//./3,  J2  5 

LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

PRINCETON.     N.    J. 

Presented  by 

TKeWid^v^  oT  U'eorde!BL\ob\n  , 

'% 

Division...l^.Z>.^  1 A 

,L.2_1(£5 

Section .\r.....V.1- 

O0|»>j'^ 

A 

COMMENTAKY 


ON  THE 


HOLY  SCRIPTURES: 

CRITICAL,  DOCTRINAL  AND  HOMILETICAL, 

WITH  SPECIAL  REFERENCE  TO  MINISTERS  AND  STUDENTS. 


BY 

JOHN  PETER  LANGE,  D.D. 

IN  CONNECTION  WITH  A  NUMBER  OF  EMINENT  EUROPEAN  DIVINES. 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN,  REVISED,  ENLARGED,  AND  EDITED 

BT 

PHILIP  SOHAFF,  D.D. 

ASSISTED  BT  AMERICAN  SCHOLAES  OF  VARIOUS  EVANGELICAL  DENOMINATIONS. 

VOL.  XII.  OP  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT:   CONTAINING  JEREMIAH  AND  LAMENTATIONS. 


NEW  YORK: 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS, 

1899 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/lamentationsofje122ng 


THE 


0^  Cf  />; 
NOV  - 


LAMENTATIONS 


07 


JEREMIAH. 


THEOLOGICALLY  AND  HOMILETICALLY  EXPOUNDED 


Dr.  c.  w  eduard  naegelsbach, 


Pastor  in  Bayreuth  Bavaria. 


TRAJfSLATED,  EMLARQEB,  AJfD  EDITED 


BY 


WM.  H.  HORNBLOWER,  D.D. 


VBOrXSBOB  OF   SACBES   RHETORIC,    CHURCH    GOVKRNMENT,    AND   PASTORAL   THEOLOOY   IN    WE8TERK     inEOLOOICA* 

SKMISART.    ALLEGHENY,    PA. 


NEW  YORK: 
CHARLES    SCRIBXER'S    SONS, 


Entkred,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1870,  by 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  «f  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Southern  District 

of  New  York. 


TfiCA'3 

PRINTING  AND   BOOKBINDING  COMPANY, 

NEW    rORK. 


TBE 


LAMENTATIONS   OF   JEREMIAH. 


INTBODUCTIOR. 


2  1.   NAME,   PLACE    IN    CANON,  LITURGICAL   USE. 

1.  In  Hebrew  MSS.  and  editions  this  book  is  called  H^'N,  i.  e.,  How!  from  the  first  word  in 
it  (as  Proverbs  and  the  Books  of  the  Pentateuch  are  designated  by  their  initial  words),  which 
word  also  begins  chs.  ii.  and  iv.,  and  thus  appears  to  be  a  characteristic  of  the  Book.*  The 
Kabbins  called  it  ^U'D,  i.  e.,  nenice,  dirges,  elegies,  elegies,  lamentations.  ^}^^.  is  found  in  the 
Old  Testament  in  2  Sam.  i.  17;  Amos  v.  1 ;  viii.  10;  Jer.  vii.  29;  ix.  19;  Ejek.  ii.  10;  xix.  1, 
14 ;  ixvi.  17  ;  xxvii.  2,  32  ;  xxviii.  12  ;  xxxii.  2,  16  ;  2  Chron.  xxxv.  25.  In  Ezek.  ii.  10  the 
plural  form  D'^p  is  used,  and  in  2  Chron.  xxxv.  25  ^irp.  The  Septuagint  always  translates 
this  word  i?p^o?,  -dpfivoi,  whence  are  derived  the  Latin  names  Threni,  Lamentationes,  La- 
menta.f 

2.  Since  Josephus,  con.  Apion,  I.  8,  states  the  number  of  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture  as 
twenty-two,  and  divides  them  into  three  classes,  the  first  consisting  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  se- 
cond of  thirteen  prophetical  books,  and  the  third  of  four  books  which  contained  v/ivovg  ng  tov 
^Eov  Kal  rolg  avdpcmoig  vTvodr^Kag  tov  fiiov  ["  hymns  to  God  and  precepts  for  the  conduct  of  human 
life  "],  it  is  evident  that  he  included  the  Lamentations,  not  in  the  D'^inJ  [Hagiographa],  but 
m  the  prophetical  Scriptures,  and  hence  that  he  appended  it  to  the  Prophecies  of  Jeremiah. 
The  same  classification  and  estimated  number  of  these  books  are  found  in  the  canon  of  Melito 
(Etjseb.  Eccl.  Hist.,  IV.  26),  where  the  Lamentations  are  not  expressly  named,  but  are  evi- 
dently reckoned  with  the  Prophetical  Books,  as  they  are  in  the  Treatise  of  Origen  on  the  oldest  ca- 
non (EuSEB.,  Hist.  Eccl.,  VI.  25),  where  it  is  said  'lepe/uiar  avv  -Bpipoiq  Kal  ttj  eTnaroTifi  kv  ivl  'lepe- 
(lia, — so  also  H1LAEIU.S  PiCTAV.  {Prolog,  to  the  Psalms),  Rupintjs  {Expos.  Symboli  ApostoL), 
the  Council  of  Laodicea,  can.  &Q  (see  Herz.  R.-Enc,  VIII.,  p.  199)  Epiphan.,  De  mens,  et 
■pond.  cap.  22,  23  {0pp.  II.,  180,  ed.  Petav.),  the  canons  of  the  African  Si/nods  of  393  {Can. 
36,  Mansi  III.  924)  and  397  ( Can.  47,  Mansi  III.  891),  Augustine  {De  doct.  Christ.,  II.  8)  and 
by  Jerome  in  the  Prolog.  Galeat.,  where  likewise  the  Lamentations  are  not  mentioned,  but  are 
evidently  appended  to  the  Prophetical  Book,  for  after  the  enumeration  of  the  twenty-two  books 
he  says,  ''  Some  would  include  Ruth  and  Lamentations  in  the  Hagiographa,  and  by  adding  these 
compute  the  whole  number  of  books  as  tweniy-four,  etc." — Another  method  of  enumeration 
and  classification  was  gradually  adopted  by  the  Jews,  the  first  trace  of  which  we  find  in  Vol.  4 
of  Ben  Ezra,  4,  44,  where  the  ninety-four  (this,  without  doubt,  is  the  correct  reading)  sacred 
books  are  divided  into  two  classes  of  seventy  and  twenty-four  books.     The  twenty-four  books, 

*  [The  word  is  especially  proper  as  indicating  the  subject  and  tone  of  its  contenti.    Gerlach]. 
f  [Syriac,  Arabic  and  later  versions  bear  similar  titles]. 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


manifestly,  are  the  canonical  ones.  The  Talmud  also,  in  the  Treatise  Baba  Bathra  FoL^  14  b. 
enumerates  twenty-four  books,  probably  in  accordance  with  the  number  of  letters  of  the  Greek 
alphabet,  which  was  made  to  correspond  with  the  Hebrew  alphabet  by  adding  to  the  latter  the 
double  yod,  '",  that  was  used  to  express  with  reverence  the  name  of  Jehovah.  The  Talmud 
now  reckons  the  Lamentations  among  the  Hagiographa,  which  it  arranges  in  the  following  order, 
Ruth,  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Soiomoa's  Song,  Lamentations,  Daniel,  Esther,  Ezra 
(with  Nehemiah),  Chronicles.  The  Masorites  introduced  a  third  modification,  arranging  the  Ha- 
giographa  thus, — Chronicles,  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Ruth,  Canticles,  Ecclesiastes,  Lamentations, 
Esther,  Daniel,  Ezra.  But  only  the  Spanish  manuscripts  preserve  this  order.  T'.s  ':  ermau 
give  the  order  thus, — Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job,  Canticles,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  xlsther, 
Daniel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Chronicles.  This  is  the  usual  order  in  our  Hebrew  editions  of  the  Bible. 
— In  the  Septuagint,  the  various  recensions  of  which  differ  from  each  other,  another  principle  of 
arrangement  prevails.  This  depends  generally  on  the  distinction  of  the  books  into  historical,  po- 
etical and  prophetical,  in  which  order  they  succeed  each  other.  But  Lamentations  is  added  to 
the  prophetical  book  of  Jeremiah.  The  Latin  versions  follow  the  same  order,  both  the  Itala  and 
Vulgate.  The  Council  of  Trent  has  sanctioned  this  arrangement,  in  Deer.  L,  Sessio  IV.,  where 
the  Lamentations,  without  being  mentioned,  are  reckoned  with  the  Prophetical  Book  of  Jere- 
miah.    Our  Protestant  Bibles  assign  the  book  to  the  same  place. 

3.  The  Masoretic  arrangement  of  the  Hagiographa,  in  separating  from  the  other  books  and 
placing  together  the  five  Megilloth  [or  festival  rolls,  which  were  appointed  for  rehearsal  on  cer- 
tain feast  and  memorial  days], — is  purely  conjectural.  For  not  earlier  than  the  Masorites  do  we 
find  these  five  books  placed  together.  The  order  of  the  German  manuscripts  is  accommodated  to 
the  succession  of  holy-days.  On  this  account  the  Song  of  Solomon  comes  first,  because  it  was 
read  at  Easter;  tnen  follows  Ruth  (Whitsuntide);  then  the  Lamentations.  These  were  read  on 
the  ninth  of  Ab,  on  which  day  the  Jews  commemorated  the  destruction  of  both  the  first  and  se- 
cond Temples.  (SeeHERZOG,i?.-^nc.,Vn.p,254). — As  the  Israelites  haveappointed  the  Lamen- 
tations for  that  great  mourning  festival,  it  is  also  a  rule  with  them  that  an  Israelite,  when 
mourning  a  death,  read  no  other  book  than  Job  and  Lamentations.  (Herz.,  R.-Enc,  XVI.  p. 
364). — In  the  Romish  Church,  passages  out  of  the  Lamentations  are  read  on  the  last  three  days 
of  Holy-week.  Three  lessons  are  assigned  to  each  one  of  the  three  days;  the  lessons  are,  on 
Maundy-Thursday,  I.  i.  1-5,  II.  i.  6-9,  III.  i.  10-14;  on  Good  Friday,  I.  ii.  8-11,  II.  ii.  12-15, 
III.  iii.  1-9;  on  Saturday,  I.  iii.  22-30,  II.  iv.  1-6,  III.  v.  1-11.  Every  lesson  concludes,  by 
way  of  response  and  versicle,  with  the  words,  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  eonvertere  ad  Domimim 
Deum  tuum,  turn  to  the  Lord  thy  God.  (See  Officium  hebdomadce  sanctce,  Separat-Abdruck 
aus  Dr.  Reischl's  Passionale.  Munchen,  1857.  Die  Qharwoche  in  ihren  Ceremonien  und  Ge- 
beten,  herausg.  mil  Gutheissung  des  bischbfl.  Ordinariats,  Speier,  1856.  Neumann,  Jeremias 
von  Anatot.  II.,  S.  486).  With  reference  to  the  musical  execution  of  the  L  imentations  in  Holy- 
week  at  Rome,  see  Die  Reisebnefe  von  Felix  Mendelsohn-Bartholdy,  Leipzig,  1861,  S.  166 
flf.  [Brief  an  Zelter  in  Berlin).  In  the  Evangelical  Church  Ludecus  and  Lossius  have  ar- 
ranged passages  of  the  Lamentations  for  Divine  service  during  the  solemnities  of  Holy-week, 
the  former  for  the  solemnities  of  the  last  three  days,  the  latter  only  for  the  solemnity  of  the 
Sunday  in  Holy-week.  And  Nicolaus  Selnecker  has  liturgically  arranged  the  whole  of  the  La- 
mentations in  the  German  language  (in  his  Kirchen-Gesdnge,  1587),  not  for  Holy -week,  but  for 
the  festival  of  the  Tenth  Sunday  after  Trinity  (the  destruction  of  Jerusalem).  Further  on  thia 
subject,  see  ScHoBEELEiN,  Schalz  des  liturg.  Ghor-und-Gemeindegesanges,  II.,  S.  444  flf. 

§  2.    CONTENTS   AND   STRUCTURE. 

1.  The  general  subject  of  the  Lamentations  is  the  destruction  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem  by  the 
Chaldeans.  That  this  book  is  a  joropAecy  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  as  Tremellius  and 
others  have  asserted  (see  Forster,  Comm.  in  Thr.,  p.  5),  is  an  utterly  groundless  opinion,  which 
we  mention  only  for  curiosity's  sake.*     Similar  Songs  of  lamentation,  having  for  their  subject 

•  [This  assertion  of  iMer  groundlessness  is  rather  strong.  2  Chron.  xxxv.  25  and  the  declaration  of  Josephus  (Ant.  B.  X^ 
ch.  V.  1 1 )  atford  some  ground  on  which  to  rest  the  hypothesis,  tliat  tliese  Lamentations  are  the  elegy  written  on  the  death 
•f  Josiah,  and  that  they  asenmed  the  form  of  a  propliecy  of  the  utter  destruction  of  the  city,  which  Josiah  might  have  pre- 


§  2.  CONTENTS  AND  STRUCTURE. 


the  death  of  individual  persons,  or  political  catastrophes,  occur  in  the  Old  Testament.  See  the 
citations  in  §  1,  1.  But  no  lamentation  of  equal  length  and  so  artistically  constructed  is  now  ex- 
tant. The  peculiar  structure  which  is  common  to  all  these  songs  shows  that  they  all  have  one 
general  subject.  In  Song  I.,  the  poet  himself  is  the  first  speaker,  vers.  1-11  5,  whilst  he  intro- 
duces to  us  Zion  [Jerusalem]  *  as  an  ideal  person.  He  pictures  here  the  sad  consequences  of 
the  destruction,  whilst  he  indicates  the  causes  of  the  same  (ver.  8).  In  the  second  half  of  the 
cLixpter  (vers.  11  c. — 22)  the  personified  Jerusalem  herself  speaks,  portraying  her  misfortunes  un- 
der manifold  images,  explainmg  their  causes  and  praying  for  help  and  vengeance.  In  Song  II., 
in  the  first  part  of  it,  the  poet  himself  speaks,  (a)  ascribing  the  destruction  to  the  agency  of  the 
Lord  (vers.  1-9),  (6)  depicting  the  consequences  of  the  destruction  (vers.  10-12),  (c)  addressing 
the  object  of  the  destruction,  namely,  the  personified  Jerusalem,  expressing  his  grief,  his  opinion 
as  to  the  causes  of  the  catastrophe,  and  exhorting  her  to  prayer  (vers.  13-19).  To  this  exhorta- 
tion Zion,  here  represented  by  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  [Zion],  responds  in  a  prayer  breathing  the 
deepest  and  acutest  sorrow  (vers.  20-22).  In  Song  III.,  which  evidently  forms  the  climax  of  the 
whole,  the  poet  introduces  as  speaking  that  man,  who  in  those  troublous  times  had  suffered  more 
than  all  others,  and  consequently  had  attained,  as  it  were,  to  the  very  summit  of  the  common 
calamity,  for  he  had  suffered  not  only  from  the  enemy  what  was  common  to  all,  but  also  from 
his  own  people  and  associates,  a  thing  unheard  of  save  in  this  particular  instance.  This  sufferer 
was  the  Prophet  Jeremiah.  He  does  not  name  him,  it  is  true,  and  it  is  evident  that  he  has  in 
his  eye,  not  the  person  of  the  prophet  merely,  but  rather  the  servant  of  the  Lord  as  a  represen- 
tative of  the  l^lapaiil  nvevfiaTiKhq)  spirituallsrael,  yet  all  the  particular  features  of  this  Lamenta- 
tion are  borrowed  from  the  history  of  that  prophet  (vers.  1-18).  This  section  ends  with  a  cry  of 
despair  (ver.  18).  But  immediately  the  poet  lets  a  morning  twilight,  as  it  were,  succeed  this  night 
of  despair,  (vers.  19  21),  which  through  the  utterances  of  united  believing  Israel  soon  expands  into 
daylight,  beaming  with  the  most  radiant  consolation  (vers.  22-38).  In  what  follows  successively, 
the  evening  twilight  gathers,  and  then  the  poem  sweeps  back  into  such  a  night  ot  grief  and 
mourning,  tiiat  Israel  begins  to  confess  his  sins  (vers.  39-42),  but  then  gives  vent  to  lamenta- 
tions on  account  of  those  sins  (vers.  43-47),  until  finally,  m  the  last  and  third  part,  Jeremiah 
again  takes  up  the  word  in  order  to  weep  out  his  grief  over  Zion's  misery  and  sins,  (those  sins 
which  were  likewise  the  source  of  his  own  misfortunes),  and  to  implore  the  Lord,  in  beseeching 
prayer,  for  protection  and  for  righteous  avengement  upon  his  enemies  (vers.  48-66).  In  Song 
IV.,  the  poem  loses  more  and  more  of  its  ideal  character.  In  the  beginning  indeed  we  find  an  ideal 
and  well  sustained  description  of  Israel,  as  if  it  were  the  nobility  of  the  nations,  and  then,  fur- 
ther, of  the  princes  of  Israel,  as  the  noblest  among  the  noble,  and  then,  appearing  in  sharper  re- 
lief by  standing  out  on  such  a  back-ground,  a  delineation  of  the  sufferings  endured  by  those  no- 
bles (vers.  1-11) ;  but  in  the  second  half  of  the  chapter  the  poem  becomes  more  prosaic :  the  chief 
guilt  is  imputed  to  the  prophets  and  the  priests,  whose  well-deserved  punishment  is  then  por- 
trayed in  the  gloomiest  colors  (vers.  12-16).  Then  follows  a  description,  graphic  in  the  highest 
degree  in  spite  of  its  brevity,  of  the  events  occurring  from  the  extinction  of  the  last  gleams  of 
the  rays  of  hope  kindled  by  the  Egyptians,  till  the  imprisonment  of  the  king  (vers.  17-20).  The 
conclusion  is  a  short  address  to  Edom,  which  is  ironically  congratulated  at  the  downfall  of  Je- 
rusalem, while,  at  the  same  time,  the  punishment  of  its  malicious  joy  is  foretold  (vers.  21,  22). 
In  Song  v.,  the  style  is  almost  entirely  prosaic.  For,  with  the  exception  of  ver.  16  a,  no  poeti- 
cal expression  is  found  in  the  whole  chapter,  rather  only  a  concrete  graphic  picture  of  the  naked 

Tented  by  a  thorough  reformation,  but  which  his  partial  reformation  delayed  for  a  brief  time,  only  to  make  it  the  more  tremen- 
dous when  it  did  come.  Therefore,  if  we  assume  that  the  Lamentations  are  the  elegy  which  Jeremiah  wrote  on  the  death  of  Jo- 
siah,  and  especially  if  we  assume  that  Jeremiah  foresaw  the  inefficiency  of  Josiab's  policy  (see  Stanley's  Jewish  Churcfi),it 
would  not  seem  strange  that  an  elegy,  written  by  Jeremiah,  the  prophet  of  the  destruction,  should  be  a  prophecy  of  the  destruo 
tion  of  the  city,  which  now,  on  account  of  Josiab's  death,  was  hastening  all  the  more  rapidly  to  its  fearful  conclusion.  Nor  is  it 
in  itself  incredible,  that  the  future  should  be  presented  in  vision  to  God's  prophet  as  distinctly  as  a  picture  of  the  historic 
past.  While  we  accept  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  as  the  production  of  the  prophet  who  wrote  the  earlier  portions  of  that  book,  we 
would  speak  only  with  respect  of  the  opinion  of  those  who  see  in  the  Lamentations  a  descriptive  prediction  of  what  was  to 
come  to  pass,  while  we  reject  the  opinion  itself  as,  on  the  whole,  untenable. — W.  H.  H.] 

*  fOur  author  uses  Zirni  in  the  widest  generic  sense.  Where  the  sense  seems  to  require  it,  without  changing  his  word, 
which  would  sometimes  involve  a  change  in  his  view  of  the  meaning  of  the  text,  the  distinguishing  name  is  inserted  iq 
brackets,  as  above. — W.  H.  H.l 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


reality.  The  alphabetical  acrostic  is  entirely  wanting  in  this  chapter.  The  whole  chapter  is  in 
tended  as  a  prayer;  for  it  begins  and  ends  with  words  of  petition  (vers.  1,  19-22).  What  lieg 
between  is  only  a  narration  of  the  principal  afflictions,  which  had  befallen  those  who  had  been 
carried  to  Babylon  and  those  who  had  fled  to  exile  in  Egypt  (vers.  2-18).  The  concluding 
prayer  expresses  the  hope  that  the  Lord,  who  cannot  Himself  change,  nor  altogether  reject  His 
people,  will  bring  them  back  again  to  Himself  and  to  their  ancient  splendor  (vers   19-22). 

2.  As  regards  its  external  structure,  the  composition  of  this  book,  both  as  a  whole  and  in  its 
several  parts,  is  so  artistic,  that  anything  like  it  can  hardly  be  found  in  any  other  book  of  Holy 
Scripture.  First  of  all  it  is  significant,  that  there  &r%  five  Songs.  For  the  uneven  number  has 
this  advantage,  that  the  middle  part  of  the  whole  Poem  is  represented  by  a  whole  number,  and 
does  not  fall  between  two  numbers,  as  it  would  in  case  there  were  an  even  number  of  songs  \i.  e., 
the  middle  part  of  the  whole  poem  is  represented  by  one  Song,  and  is  not  composed  of  parts  of 
two  songs].  By  this  means  the  prominence  of  the  middle  Song  and,  in  connection  with  that, 
an  ascent  and  a  descent,  a  crescendo  and  decrescendo  movement,  with  a  clearly  marked  climax, 
is  made  possible.  Thus  it  is  manifest  that  the  third  chapter  constitutes  the  climax.  And  thi» 
is  truly  and  really  so  in  two  respects,  both  as  to  matter  and  form.  As  to  the  first,  we  have  al- 
ready shown  that  the  first  two  chapters  bear  an  ideal  and  highly  poetical  character.  They  con- 
stitute only  the  front-steps  to  the  third  chapter,  which,  externally,  as  the  middle  of  the  five 
songs  and  by  its  internal  character,  conducts  us  into  the  very  middle  of  the  night  into  which 
Israel  sank,  and  then  of  the  day  which  rose  over  Israel.  For  are  not  the  frightful  sorrows  which 
the  Prophet  Jeremiah,  the  servant  of  God  and  representative  of  the  spiritual  Israel,  had  endured, 
and  which  rose  at  last  to  that  terrible  exclamation — My  strength  and  my  hope  is  •perished from- 
Jehovah  (iii.  18),  the  expressions  of  the  highest  outward  and  inward  temptation  which  can  befall 
a  true  servant  of  the  Lord?  Here  it  should  be  observed  that  in  iii.  1-17,  there  is  no  reference 
to  God  except  as  the  author  of  those  sorrows  which  are  represented,  on  that  account,  as  Div^ine 
temptations  ;  while  the  name  of  God  is  not  even  mentioned  till  at  the  end  of  ver.  18,  where,  as  the 
last  word,  with  startling  vehemence,  the  name  "Jehovah"  is  pronounced.  Here  then  we  see 
the  servant  of  the  Lord,  in  the  deepest  night  of  his  misery,  on  the  brink  of  despair.  But  where 
exigency  is  greatest,  help  is  nearest.  The  poet  could  lay  up  in  his  heart  everything  that  he  had 
against  God,  but  he  could  not  shut  God  Himself  out  of  his  heart.  On  the  contrary  it  was 
proved,  that,  after  he  had  given  the  fullest  expression  to  what  he  had  in  his  heart  against  God, 
God  Himself  was  deeply  rooted  therein.  The  night  is  succeeded  by  the  dawn  of  morning,  as 
represented  in  vers.  19-21,  With  ver.  22,  breaks  the  full  day.  This  usher.-?  in  with  full  efi'ul- 
gence  the  light  of  Heavenly  consolation.  Suffering  now  is  seen  to  be  the  proof  of  God's  love. 
In  this  love,  that  suffering  finds  its  explanation,  its  limit,  and  its  remedy.  As  the  pyramid  of 
Mont  Blanc,  seen  at  sunset  from  Chamouny,  its  summit  gleaming  with  supernal  splendors, 
whilst  below,  the  mountain  has  already  disappeared  wrapped  in  deepest  darkness  (See  Gothe's 
Letters  from  Switzerland,  Nov.  4,  1779;  Aug.  12,  18-10),  so,  out  of  the  profound  night  of  despair 
and  misery,  this  middle  part  of  the  third  song  and  of  the  whole  book  towers  upward,  radiant 
with  light.  From  this  culmination  point,  the  poet  again  sets  out  upon  his  downward  track. 
Evening  twilight  follows  the  bright  day  (vers.  40-42)  and  passes  into  a  night  dark  with  misery 
(vers.  43-47).  From  the  beginning  of  the  section,  so  full  of  hope  and  encouragement  (ver.  22), 
the  poet  speaks  in  the  plural  number,  as  if  he  would  make  it  most  emphatically  apparent,  that 
this  was  common  property.  He  continues  to  speak  in  the  plural  number  till  after  the  beginning 
of  the  third  and  last  part  of  the  Song,  when  the  night  has  begun  again.  Then  once  more  (ver. 
48),  the  poet  speaks  in  the  singular  number.  But  he  no  longer  speaks  of  those  highest  tempta- 
tions, which  were  the  subject  of  vers.  1-18,  but  of  those  inferior  ones,  which  men  indict  upon  us. 
He  treats  of  them  also  much  more  briefly  ;  and  from  ver.  55  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  finds  re- 
lief in  a  prayer  for  help  and  avengement. — It  is  evident  that  this  chapter  consists  of  three  parts. 
The  first  part  includes  vers.  1-21;  the  second,  vers.  22-42;  the  third,  vers.  43-66.  The  second 
part  represents  the  culmination  point  of  the  whole  book.  It  constitutes  the  point  of  separation 
between  the  crescendo  and  decrescendo  movement.  The  latter  continues  in  chapter  fourth,  in 
which  the  ideal  and  poetical  sensibly  subside,  until  at  last  in  chapter  fifth  the  style  changes  into 
plain  prose. — With  this  artistic  arrangement  of  the  matter,  the  external  form  or  structure  cor- 


§  2.  CONTENTS  AND  STRUCTURE. 


responds.  Every  one  of  the  five  Songs  has  22  verses,  according  to  the  number  of  letters  in  the 
Hebrew  alphabet,  only  in  the  third  Song  every  verse  is  divided  into  three  members,  hence  it  haa 
66  (masoretic)  verses.  The  first  four  Songs  are  acrostics.  In  the  first  two  Songs  the  verses 
consist  of  three  distiches.  It  has  been  usual  to  recognize  four  distiches  in  i.  7  and  ii.  9,  but  im- 
properly :  for  there  is  no  fixed  measure  for  the  length  of  each. member  of  the  distich ;  and  there 
are,  therefore,  in  the  places  referred  to,  only  three  distiches,  some  lines  of  which  are  composed 
of  a  greater  number  of  syllables  than  the  others  have.  The  third  chapter  shows  by  its  external 
dress  that  it  is  the  middle  and  climax  of  the  whole.  The  three  distiches  of  each  verse  (corres- 
ponding to  three  Masoretic  verses  successively)  begin  with  the  same  alphabetical  letter.  The 
middle  part,  namely  iii.  19-42,  is  still  further  distinguished,  as  the  dome  crowning  the  whole 
building,  as  follows :  (1),  Every  verse-triad  constitutes  a  finished  whole  with  respect  to  sense 
[is  one  complete  sentence],  (2).  In  vers.  25-39,  each  distich  begins  with  the  same  word,  or 
with  a  similar  word  (see  Intr.  to  chap.  iii.).  (3).  While  in  vers.  1-18,  the  name  of  God  is  men- 
tioned only  once,  and  then  with  peculiar  emphasis  at  the  end  of  ver.  18,  m  vers.  19-42  we  read 
the  names  of  God  repeatedly,  and  so  arranged  that  in  vers.  22,  24,  25,  26  we  have  n'in%  in  vers. 
31,  36,  37  "J'lX  alternating  with  jv'^j?  in  vers.  35,  38,  in  ver.  40  again  T^^p]  and  at  last  in  ver.  41 
D]Dt:?3  7X.  Observe  here,  particularly,  that  f/if  occurs  in  the  Lamentations  only  in  the  two  places 
named  above,  and  'J^f^  occurs  only  once,  in  the  beginning  of  the  decrescendo  movement,  ver.  58, 
whilst  in  chapter  first  it  is  used  three  times,  vers.  14,  15  (twice),  and  in  chapter  second  seven 
times,  vers.  1,  2,  5,  7,  18,  19,  20.  Chapter  fourth  is  indeed  an  acrostic,  but  the  decline  of  the 
poetical  afflatus  is  indicated  externally  by  the  verses  being  composed  of  only  two  distiches.  The 
solemn  names  of  God  ''J^X  and  jlwj;  occur  no  more,  on  the  other  hand  mn'  occurs  three  times, 
vers.  11,  16,  20.  The  fifth  chapter  indicates  its  relation  to  the  four  preceding  ones  only  by  the 
number  of  verses  (22).  The  acrostic  dress  entirely  disappears.  The  style  has  become  prose. 
Yet  the  name  of  God  nin^  is  found  three  times  in  the  words  of  prayer,  vers.  1,  19,  21. 

We  have  here  only  one  other  matter  to  remark  upon,  the  question  why  in -chapters  ii.,  iii.  and 
iv.  3  is  placed  before  i?.  This  is  usually  explained  as  a  copyist's  mistake.  In  fact  some  Codd.  in 
Kennicott  and  De  Rossi  have  these  verses  in  their  usual  places.  The  Peschito  also  gives  these 
verses  in  their  proper  alphabetical  order.  The  Septuagjnt  places  the  letters  in  their  proper  order 
in  the  margin,  but  leaves  the  verses  themselves  to  follow  each  other  in  the  order  of  the  original. 
But  this  supposition  of  an  error  of  transcriber  is  refuted,  (1)  by  the  fact  that  it  is  repeated  three 
times,  (2)  by  the  impossibility  of  supposing  that  in  chap.  iii.  three  verses  could  have  been  trans- 
posed by  mistake,  (3)  by  the  interruption  of  the  sense  which  would  result  in  chapters  iii.  and  iv. 
[if  the  present  order  were  changed].  If  some  Codd.  and  Versions  have  the  letters  in  their  right 
order,  this  is  evidence  of  revision  and  correction.  Others  (as  RiEaLER)  explain  this  irregularity 
as  merely  arbitrary,  others  again  (Bertholdt)  as  the  result  of  forgetfulness  on  the  part  of  the 
author.  Grotiuh  holds  the  singular  opinion  that  the  order  in  chapters  ii.,  iii.,  iv.  may  be  that 
of  the  Chaldaic  alphabet,  and  therefore  that  Jeremiah  in  chap,  i,  "speaks  as  a  Hebrew,  in  the  fol- 
lowing chapters  as  a  subject  of  the  Chaldeans,"  Thenius  would  explain  the  alphabetical  differ- 
ence by  a  diversity  of  authors,  but  the  unity  of  the  plan,  already  proved  above,  and  the  unity 
ot  the  language  used,  which  will  be  proved  in  §  3  (to  which  also  belongs  the  threefold  HD'N  at 
the  beginning  of  chaps,  ii.,  iii.,  iv.)  contradict  this  most  decidedly,  Evstald  is  (even  still  in  his 
Second  Edition,  p.  326)  of  the  opinion  that  the  i^  in  chapter  i,  "  might  have  been  transferred  to 
its  own  place  by  later  hands."  But  this  would  be  a  manifest  interruption  of  the  connection  : 
for  ver.  16  is  directly  connected  in  the  closest  manner  with  ver.  15  by  \2  S^  therefore,  [nSK-'7;r 
for  these  things?],  whilst  ver.  18  [17?]  begins  a  new  thought.  The  liberty  which  the  older 
poets  especially  allowed  themselves  in  pursuing  the  alphabetical  order  (see  Ps.  ix.,  x.,  xxv., 
xxxvii.,  cxlv.,  and  Keil  in  Haevernick's  Introduction  to  Old  Testament,  III.,  p.  50)  are  mani- 
lold  [See  Barnes'  Introduction  to  lob,  pp.  44,  45].  Whether  they  were  influenced  in  this  by  a 
then  prevailing  diversity  of  method  in  respect  to  the  succession  of  the  letters,  is  not  yet  by  any 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


meana  sufficiently  ascertained,  but  is  nevertheless  the  most  likely  explanation  of  that  liberty. 
See  Delitzsch  on  Ps.  cxlv.,  p.  769.* 

§  3.   AUTHOR   AND   TIME   OF   COMPOSITION. 

1.  That  the  Prophet  Jeremiah  was  the  author  of  this  book,  not  only  is  an  old  tradition,  but 
has  been  maintained  by  the  majority  of  commentators  up  to  the  present  time.  Yet  there  is  no 
canonical  [Scriptural  ?]  testimony  for  it.  For  neither  in  the  later  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
nor  in  the  New  Testament,  is  Jeremiah  ever  named  as  the  author  of  Lamentations.  There  is 
not  in  the  above  named  parts  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  a  single  quotation  from  the  Lamentations. 
The  passage  in  James  i.  12,  which  is  appealed  to,  has  only  a  very  general  resemblance  to  Lam. 
iii.  26 ;  and  as  regards  Zech.  i.  6,  the  expression  DOT  IKfXD  n'ln;  Hu'^  [Jehovah  hath  done  like 
as  He  purposed]  is  not  specific  enough,  and  if  it  is  a  quotation  could  refer  to  Jer.  li.  12,  as  well 
as  to  Lam.  ii.  17.  But  the  Alexandrian  translation  has  preceding  i.  1,  these  words,  Kai  kyivero  /lera 
TO  aJ^waAoiriciJ^vai  tov  'Icjpaf/Ti  Kal  'lepovaaTifju.  kprffiu^r/vac,  ind'&Laev  'lepefiiag  K?^aiuv  Koi  k'&pT/i'T/aE  rov 
■&p7jvov  ToiiTov  £ttI  'IspovaaXfjfj.  Kal  elne.  ["And  it  came  to  pass,  after  Israel  had  been  carried  away 
captive,  and  Jerusalem  was  become  desolate,  that  Jeremiah  sat  weeping,  and  lamented  with  this 
lamentation  over  Jerusalem,  and  said."]  The  Vulgate  also  has  these  words,  except  that  in  place 
of  the  simple  Kal  eItte  [and  he  said],  it  has  the  words,  et  amaro  animo  suspirans  et  ejulans  dixit 
["  and  with  a  sorrowful  mind,  sighing  and  moaning,  he  said  "  (Douay)].  The  Arabic  gives  ex- 
actly the  words  of  the  Septuagint.  The  Targum  Jonathan  begins  with  the  words,  Dixit  Jere- 
mias  propheta  et  sace7-dos  magnus  [Jeremiah  the  prophet  and  chief  priest  (?  X3]1  i^Jn^!)  said]. 
Josephus  in  the  Antiq.  Jud.  L.,  x.  c.  5,  §  1,  after  he  has  spoken  of  the  death  and  burial  of  King 

Josiah,  says,  'lepEfiia^  d'  6  'KpO(j)ijTJ]Q  kniKrjSEiov  avrov  cvvha^e  iiHoq  -dprfVTjTiKov,  o  Kal  /UE^pi  vrr  (hauhec 
["  and  Jeremiah  the  prophet  composed  an  elegy  to  lament  him  which  is  extant  till  this  time 
also"  (Whiston's  Jbs<?/»/m.s')].f  Thenius  is  of  the  opinion  that  this  asserts  only  the  existence 
of  the  elegy  on  the  death  of  Josiah  composed  by  Jeremiah,  and  has  no  reference  at  all  to  the 
Lamentations.  But  I  believe  that  Thenius  here  is  in  error.  For  the  words  of  Josephus  can- 
not be  translated  the  [solenne)  elegy  on  Josiah,  because  in  that  case  it  must  have  been  called  to 
i-uiKijfiuov  avTov  [the  elegy  on  him].  We  can  only  translate  thus, — Jeremiah  composed  as  an  elegy 
on  him  a  lamentation  song,  which  is  still  extant.  To  call  it  to  kniKtidEiov  {the  elegy)  would  im- 
ply that  the  poem  then  existing  really  belonged  to  the  species  ''elegy,"  that  is  to  say,  it  possessed 
all  the  peculiarities  of  such  a  poem  and  was  manifestly  the  solenne  [elegy]  on  the  deceased  king 
Josiah  that  the  customs  of  the  times  demanded.  J     But  the  absence  of  the  article  marks  the  still 

*  rfi  riRLAcn:  Intr.  pp.  9,  10:  "The  general  remark  'that  the  Poet  strictly  confined  himself  to  the  external  form,  only  so 
long  as  tlie  thought  accommodated  itself  to  it  without  artificiality '  (Keil,  EM.,  S.  378 ;  6.  Haevernick,  III.  58),  does  not 

6u£9ce, for  the  evident  ease  with  which  the  Poet  elsewhere  manages  tne  Form,  [shows]  that  another  arrangement 

of  the  alphabet  would  have  had  no  diflBculties  for  him.  And  how  little  the  observations  which  Neumann  {S.  490,  508)  makes 
in  the  way  of  explanation,  contain  an  explanation  in  reality,  may  be  shown  by  his  remark  on  ii.  16,  where  lie  says,  '  Let  us 
only  reflect  on  the  difference  between  N3  mouth,  and  VV  ej/e,  and  we  Jiere  at  least  compreliend  the  transposition,  where  the 

mouth  is  tlie  exulting  mouth  of  God's  enemies,  the  eye — God's  watchful  eye  over  the  life  of  His  people.'  That  could  only 
be  the  real  meaning  if  the  following  y-yerse  treated  of  God's  eye  watching  for  the  protection  of  His  people ;  on  the  very 
contrary,  it  does  treat  of  tlie  execution  of  punishment.  But  in  view  of  the  unsuccessful  results  of  the  special  and  repeated 
attempts  to  throw  light  on  the  darkness  of  this  anomaly,  the  author  must  close  this  part  of  his  preliminary  discussion  with 
a  non  liqueiy] 

•f-  [The  literal  translation  is,  "  Jeremiah  the  prophet  composed  an  elegy  on  him,  a  lamentation  song,  which  is  extant  now." 
The  words  "a  lamentation  song,"  so  obviously  superfluous,  suggest  the  question,  whetiier  the  wjrd.s  ;cxi  avt'dra^e,  or  words 
of  similar  import,  may  not  once  have  preceded  /ae'Ao;  9privr]TiKbi',  and  been  dropped  out  on  a  presumption  of  error  by  those  who 
took  for  granted  that  all  Jeremiali  wrote  still  survived  ?  This  would  suit  what  immediately  follows,  which  consists  of  an 
account  of  Jeremiah's  writings. — W.  II.  II.] 

:J:  [Thenius  :  Josephus  "  only  said,  that  Jeremiah  had  composed  the  (solenne)  elegy  [funeral-poem]  on  Josiah,  and  that  this 
was  still  extant  in  his  (Josephus')  time  ;  how  and  where,  whether  in  writing  or  in  the  mouth  of  the  people  [by  oral  tradi- 
tion] he  does  not  say,  and  least  of  all  does  he  say  that  he  finds  that  particular  dirge  (the  singular  number  sli'.uld  not  be  un- 
observed) in  the  HDX  [Book  of  Lamentations] ;  had  he  believed  this,  since  he  adhered  almost  exclusively  to  Cn-  \  i  !■.]  ...  u,' 

r  •  *" 
the  LXX.,  he  would  have  surely  added  to  Sia/xevei  [is  extant]  the  words  iv  toi?  Sp^roi?  [in  the  Lamentations]."  The 
strongest  point  in  this  argument  is,  not  the  interpolation  of  the  definite  article,  to  wiiich  Dr.  N.^EGELsn.icn  justly  takes  ex- 
ception, but  the  fact  that  Josephus  not  only  fails  to  say  that  this  dirge  is  extant  in  the  Book  of  Lamentations,  but  speaks  of 
it  only  in  the  singular  number  its  "a  song  of  lamentation  "  (fifAo?  OpitvrjTiKoi').  Wo  can  account  for  this  onlj',  by  supposing 
that  he  regarded  the  five  songs  as  essentially  one,  and  that  having  already  characterized  it  as  a  lamentation  song,  he  could 


§  3.  AUTHOR  AND  TIME  OF  COMPOSITION. 


extant  uD^q  ■QprjvriTiKbv  [song  of  lamentation]  as  not  necessarily  belonging  to  the  species  "  elegy," 
but  only  as  a  hemq  [song]  which  had  served  as  an  elegy.  This  admirably  suits  the  Lamenta- 
tions, which  indeed  contain  not  a  single  syllable  referring  to  a  dead  king.  Add  to  this,  that 
Josephus  in  the  same  chapter,  after  he  had  related  the  death  and  burial  of  Josiah,  seizes  the  op- 
portunity to  give  a  short  notice  of  the  prophets  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  and  of  their  writings. 
For  after  the  words  quoted,  he  proceeds  thus,  "This  prophet  also  predicted,  and  left  [those  pre- 
dictions] in  writing,  the  calamity  that  was  coming  upon  the  city,  and  truly  as  well  that  destruc- 
tion which  has  in  our  days  come  upon  us,  as  the  Babylonish  captivity.  But  not  only  he  fore- 
told such  things,  but  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  who  first  wrote  and  left  behind  him  two  books  con- 
cerning these  things."  However  we  understand  the  somewhat  obscure  words  concerning  the 
writings  of  Ezekiel,  this  much  at  least  is  evident,  that  Josephus  intends-  to  give  here  a  brief 
notice  of  the  writings  of  the  prophets  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel.  And  so  he  says,  Jeremiah  has  left 
behind  him  two  writings,  a  lamentation  song  and  prophecies,  Ezekiel  has  likewise  left  behind 
him  prophecies,  and  truly  in  two  books.  Thenius  says,  if  Josephus  had  meant  our  Lamenta- 
tions by  that  ntloq  ^prjVTjTLiibv  [lamentation  song],  then  he  would  have  written  iv  rote,  ^pipoLq  [in 
the  Lamentations].  But  I  maintain  on  the  contrary,  that  if  Josephus  meant  the  Sprivoi  [Lamen- 
tations] by  the  /^f/^.  i?/)^.  [lamentation  song],  the  addition  ev  role  -dprpioig  [in  the  Lamentations]  was 
not  necessary  [see  note,  p.  6.— W.  H.  H.],  but  if  he  intended  to  say  what  Thenius  makes  him 
say,  then  he  would  have  written  ovk  h  rolg  T^pf/voic  [not  in  the  Lamentations].  For  since  Jose- 
phus in  this  place  speaks,  not  only  of  the  elegy  on  Josiah's  death,  but  likewise  of  the  writings 
of  Jeremiah  generally,  and  since  in  his  times  our  Lamentations  were  already  regarded  as  a  writing 
of  Jeremiah's,  as  we  know  by  the  superscription  of  the  Septuagint,  he  should,  not  to  be  en- 
tirely unintelligible,  expressly  declare  that  he  did  not  mean  by  this  iidloQ  ^pr/vrjrmbv  [lamentation 
song]  which  Jeremiah  had  composed  on  the  death  of  Josiah,  the  ■dprjvoi  [Book  of  Lamentations]. 
Since  he  has  not  done  this,  every  one  who  knows  that  there  are  two  writings  in  the  canon  which 
are  referred  back  to  Jeremiah  as  their  author,  must  understand  the  words  of  Josephus  as  in- 
tended to  designate  those  two  writings  extant  in  the  canon.  According  to  this,  therefore,  Jose- 
sephus  regarded  Jeremiah  as  the  author  of  the  Lamentations,  in  which  he,  as  Jerome  did  (Com- 
ment., Zech.  vii.  11),  recognized  the  elegy  on  Josiah  mentioned  in  2  Chron.  xxxv.  25-.  Among  the 
moderns,  Usher,  J.  D.  Michaelis  (on  Low^th  de  sacr.  poes.  Hebr.  Not.  97,  pp.  445  sqq.),  and 
Dathe  {prophetce  maj.,  ed.  1)  shared  this  opinion,  but  both  the  latter  receded  from  it  (see  iV. 
Or.  Bibl.  I.,  106,  and  Dathe ^rqp^.  maj.,  ed.  2).  The  Talmud  also  regards  Jeremiah  as  the 
author  of  Lamentations  [Baba  batr.,  Fol.  15,  Col.  1),  Jeremias  scripsit  librum  smim  et  librum 
regum  et  threnos  [Jeremiah  wrote  his  own  book  and  the  book  of  Kings  and  the  Lamentations]. 
This  is  the  opinion  also  of  the  church  fathers,  all  of  them,  (see  Origen  in  Euseb.  hist,  ecd.,  Jv. 
25,  Jerome  in  Prolog,  galeat.,  and  on  Zech.  xii.  11)  and  of  later  theologians.  The  learneu  and 
whimsical  Herman  von  der  Haardt,  in  a  Programme  in  which  he  announced  a  commentary 
on  Lamentations  {Helmstddt,  1712),  was  the  first  to  deny  the  authorship  of  Jeremiah  ascribing 
the  book  to  Daniel,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  Abednego,  and  the  king  Joachin,  assuming  thai  each 
one  of  them  had  written  one  chapter.  Later,  the  unknown  author  of  an  Essay  in  the  Tubingen 
Theol.  Quart.,  1819,  Part  1, — afterwards,  though  only  in  the  way  of  conjecture,  Augusti,  in  his 
Intr.  to  the  Old  Test.  Scrip.,  p,  227,— and  again  Conz  in  Bengel's  Archiv,  IV.  pp.  161,  162, 
422  sqq., — express  themselves  as  against  the  authorship  of  Jeremiah.  Kalkar  also  in  his  com- 
mentary [Hafnix,  1836)  thinks  it  suspicious  that  the  Book  so  long  retained  its  place  among  the 
Hagiographa  and  that  the  Greek  version  of  it  diflfers  so  much  from  that  of  the  prophetical  book, 
although  he  will  not  allow  that  those  circumstances  are  decisive,  as  in  fact  they  are  not. 
Ewald,  who  in  the  first  edition  of  the  Poetical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament  (1839,  V.  1,  pp. 
139  flf.)  in  no  way  impugned  the  traditional  opinion,  has  since  (Gesch.  Isr.  IV.  S.  22  flf.  ;  see 
Jahrb.  fur  bibl,  Wissenschaft,  VII.  S.  151;  Foet.  Biicher,  2te.  Aufl.  1.  I'h.  2te.  ffd^fte.,  p. 
321  S.)  expressed  his  opinion  to  this  effect,  that  'Jeremiah's  authorship,  with  nothing  to  prove 
it,  may  be  regarded  as  impossible  on  the  ground  of  the  language  alone.'     He  believes  that  the 


not  add  that  this  Song  was  found  (iv  rois  flpiji/oi?)  in  the  Snngs  of  Lamentation,  without  seeming  to  specify  onr  jit^ie  Son.a 
of  the  five  a.s  separately  and  particularly  intended.  Thexiis  in  his  ijuotation  of  Josephus  omits  the  won  O/hivjiti-koi 
(IGtIi  i;d.,  Leipzig,  l8o5,  p.  116),  and  geems  to  have  wholly  overlooked  it.— W.  U.  H.l 


8  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

author  was  probably  one  of  Jeremiah's  disciples,  "  Baruch  or  some  other."  Bunsen  also  [before 
Ewald]  ascribes  the  authorship  to  Baruch  [Gott  in  der  Oeschichte,  I.  iS'.  426).  Thenius  an- 
nounces the  opinion  in  his  commentary  (lOie.  Lief,  des  kurzgef.  exeg.  Hdb.  z.  A.  T.,  1855,  §  3 
der  Vorheynm.,  S.  117,]  that  chapters  ii.  and  iv.  are  indeed  by  Jeremiah,  but  the  other  parts  pro- 
ceeded from  other  authors.  He  combats  the  argument  drawn  from  tradition,  and  whilst  he  in- 
fers from  the  difference  between  the  proeraium  of  the  Septuagint  and  that  of  the  Vulgate,  that 
there  was  a  Hebrew  original,  he  also  infers  from  the  absence  of  the  same  in  the  Hebrew  Codd.  that 
the  Jews  doubted  its  genuineness,  and  thus  he  accounts  for  the  transposition  of  the  Lamenta- 
tions to  the  Ketubim  [or  Hagiographa].  He  contends  further,  that  the  traditional  opmion  is  not 
confirmed  by  the  subject-matter,  spirit-tone  and  language,  or  by  the  character  of  unity  in  the 
Book  itself.*  He  finds  it  highly  unlikely  that  Jeremiah  should  have  treated  of  the  same  sub- 
ject j?i'e  times.-\  He  says  further,  "It  requires  only  a  very  ordinary  degree  of  aesthetical  sensi- 
bility to  distinguish  the  difference  between  Odes  ii.,iv.,  which  are  really  fine,  unconstrainedly 
animated,  methodical  and  natural  in  arrangement  and  succession  of  ideas,  and  remarkable  for 
their  simplicity,  and  the  dissimilar  and  weaker  Songs,  i.,  iii.,  which,  whatever  excellence  they 
have  in  other  respects,  are  hampered  with  the  external  form,  in  many  ways  artificial,  here  and 
there  heaping  up  images  and  confusing  them  together  and  losing  themselves  in  reminiscences  of 
the  past."  To  this  he  adds,  that  i.,  iii.,  v.,  among  other  things,  record  circumstances  in  which 
Jeremiah  had  no  part.  Finally  the  fact,  that  in  ii.,  iv.,  the  verses  beginning  with  3  precede 
those  beginning  with  ^  is  only  explicable  by  assuming  a  diversity  of  authors.  Agreeably  to 
these  sentiments,  Thenius  ascribed  chapters  ii.,  iv.,  to  Jeremiah,  as  already  remarked,  but  is  of 
the  opinion  that  chapter  i.  was  composed  "  some  time  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  by  one 
who  had  remained  in  the  land,  and  who  at  least  was  acquainted  with  chap.  ii. ;"  and  that  chap, 
iii.  was  composed,  also  by  one  remaining  in  the  land,  shortly  before  the  last  deportation.  He 
regards  Song  V.,  finally,  as  "the  entirely  disconnected  poetry  of  a  man  there  [in  the  land]  who 
was  probably  a  leader  of  a  crowd  of  nobles,  who  having  refused  to  join  the  expedition  to  Egypt, 
wandered  about  everywhere  seeking  a  safer  place  of  refuge."J  These  arguments  of  Thenius 
have  no  matter-of-fact  foundation,  and  cannot  therefore  be  convincing. 

As  for  me,  formerly  I  was  so  convinced  that  Jeremiah  was  the  author,  as  to  declare  this  con- 
viction in  the  article  "  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,"  in  Herzog's  Real  Encyclopaedia,  and  even 
in  various  places  in  my  exposition  of  Jeremiah.  But  my  conviction  has  been  shaken  on  more 
accurate  examination  by  the  following  matters  of  fact.  1.  The  tradition  originates  from  the 
testimony  of  the  Alexandrian  translation.  But  on  what  does  this  testimony  itself  rest  ?  We 
are  compelled  to  ask  this  question,  for  the  authority  of  that  translation  is  by  itself  an  entirely 
insufficient  foundation.  It  is  possible  that  the  Alexandrian  translator  had  predecessors  in  his 
opinion.     But  no  evidence  of  that  nature  has  come  to  us.^     It  is  further  possible  that  he,  or  his 

*  [Oerlach  :  "  The  grounds  of  Ewald's  opinions  [as  to  the  authorship]  are  only  philological ,  but  how  venturesome  it  is 
to  attempt  to  decide  on  such  grounds  alone,  is  shown  by  a  comparison  between  Thenius  and  Ewald  ;  the  former  of  whom, 
on  philological  grounds— those  very  grounds  the  perception  of  which  may  belong  only  to  "■  an  xsthttical  sensibility  thoroughly 
practised' — imputes  chapters  i.,  iii.,  v.  to  another  author  than  the  author  of  chapters  ii.  and  iv.,  which  he  leaves  to  Jere- 
miah; whilst  Ewald,  and  truly  in  our  opinion  with  entire  correctness,  remarks,  that  'all  these  five  songs,  in  the  structure 
of  their  language,  and  in  their  rhetorical  and  poetical  characteristics,  as  well  as  in  thought  and  doctrine,  and  also  in  their 
historical  allusions  and  descriptions,  have  a  similarity  so  complete,  that  every  competent  judge  will  ascribe  them  to  only  one 
Poet.'  {Bibl.  Jahrh.,  VII.  S.  151.    Comp.  Didder  d.  A.  B.,  3d  Aufl.,  S.  325  f.)."J 

t[GERLACH:  "Against  the  authorship  of  all  five  Songs  by  Jeremiah,  Thenius  again  raises  a  general  objection  in  the  ques- 
tion  whether  it  were  probable  that  Jeremiah  had  treated  one  and  the  same  subject  five  times.  But  if,  according  to  his 
own  declaration,  the  treatment  of  the  same  subject  twice  over  has  'nothing  strange  in  it  considering  the  extraordinary 
character  of  the  event  lamented,'— then  this  objection  to  the  five  Songs  appears  all  the  more  trivial  when  it  is  found  on  ex- 
amination, that  each  Song  treats  of  the  common  subject  from  a  different  point  of  view.  *  *  *  But  this  objection  is  entirely 
destroyed  by  the  acknowledgment,  arrived  at  from  most  different  stand-points,  of  the  '  internal,  organic  connection  '  (Keil) 
of  all  five  Songs,  of  which  statement  Ewald  especially  has  made  great  use  (BiU.  Jahrh.,  VII.  S.  152;  Gutt.  gel.  Anz.,  1863,  S 
<^34  f. ;  THehterdes  A.  B  ,  3d  Aufl..  .ST.  3i?)."  Gkrlach  adds  in  anote,  that  with  the  proof  of  this  "  internal,  organic  connec- 
tion "  between  the  five  Songs,  the  various  attempts  to  assign  the  composition  of  the  Songs  to  different  times,  or  to  bring  them 
into  different  arrangements,  must  fall  to  the  ground.— W.  H.  H.] 

X  [Gerlach,  with  reference  to  Thenius'  theory  concerning  Song  V.,  says,  "  It  is  difficult  seriously  to  discuss  the  possibility 
of  such  conjectures  in  order  to  prove  them:  Thenius  has  not  even  attempted  the  proof  and  has  thus  spared  those  who  come 
after  him  the  trouble  of  refutation."] 

J  [The  evidence  may  not  be  satisfactory  to  Dr.  Naeqelsbach,  but  ho  should  not  say  so  absolutely  that  there  is  "no  evi. 


5  3.  AUTHOR  AND  TIME  OF  COMPOSITION. 


predecessors,  or  both,  derived  that  opinion  from  the  book  itself.  For  it  is  easy  to  suppose  that 
the  prophet,  who  had  himself  lived  to  see  Jerusalem's  fall,  should  write  upon  it  an  appropriate 
dirge.  This  was  more  likely  to  be  supposed  since  this  prophet  had  formerly  been  acknowledged 
as  a  composer  of  dirges  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  25).  Moreover,  how  could  a  tearful  song  over  Jerusa- 
lem's downfall  fail  to  be  expected  from  that  prophet  who  had  said,  "  Oh,  that  my  head  were 
waters,  and  mine  eye  a  fountain  of  tears,  that  I  might  weep  day  and  night  for  the  slain  of  the 
daughter  of  my  people  I"  (viii.  23).  Add  to  this,  that  in  chapter  iii.  the  poet  seems  to  identify 
himself  with  the  prophet,  and  that  the  undeniably  obvious  and  sympathetic  harmony  with  the 
prophetical  writings  of  Jeremiah  seems  to  confirm  that  identity.  The  probability,  therefore, 
that  Jeremiah  may  have  written  a  book  of  this  description,  cannot  be  denied.  But  how  stands 
it  with  the  evidence  which  the  book  itself,  in  ch.  iii.,  seems  to  give  in  regard  to  its  author,  and 
how  with  the  harmony  in  the  way  of  thought  and  language  ?  As  for  the  internal  evidence  of 
ch.  iii.,  in  the  first  and  third  parts  of  that  chapter  the  prophet  Jeremiah  certainly  speaks.  But 
the  question  occurs,  whether  he  speaks  as  the  author,  or  whether  the  author  makes  him  speak  ? 
Either  is  in  itself  possible.  For  since  the  author  in  i.  11  makes  the  personified  Zion  speak,  he 
may  likewise  in  ch.  iii.  make  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  as  the  representative  of  the  'lapaeX  nvEv/xa- 
TMog  [the  spiritual  Israel],  speak.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  since  in  ch.  ii.  the  author  is  the 
speaker  and  there  speaks  of  himself  in  vers.  11,  13,  so  in  iii.  1-28,  48-66,  the  author  may  be 
the  speaker,  and  according  to  the  purport  of  the  contents,  he  is  speaking  of  himself.  But  here 
two  things  are  to  be  taken  into  account.  The  first  is  this,  that  ch.  iii.  (see  the  exposition)  con- 
stitutes the  middle  and  climax  of  the  whole  book.  Here  the  artistic  construction  reaches  ita 
highest  pinnacle,  and  the  prophet  speaking  in  the  first  and  last  of  the  three  parts,  forms  with 
hi3  mournful  lamentations  the  background  for  the  bright  and  consolatory  section  contained  in 
vers.  22-42.  Is  it  now  likely  that  Jeremiah  would  thus  have  made  his  own  person  the  middle- 
point  of  the  poem  and  would  have  done  this  with  so  much  art?*  To  me  this  seems  not  likely, 
even  though  it  is  assumed  that  the  prophet  speaks  here  in  the  name  of  the  whole  Jehovah-faith- 
ful Israel.  Jeremiah,  who  was  so  modest  and  humble,  would  at  the  most  have  let  his  personal 
sufi'erings  appear,  if  at  all,  only  as  an  element  or  constituent  part  of  the  sufiering  which  the 
faithful  Israel  had  to  sufi"er  in  common.  But  it  does  not  seem  like  him  thus  to  place  his  own 
person  in  the  foreground  as  he  does  in  that  section  which  begins  with  "  I  am  the  man,"  iii.  1. 
In  regard  to  the  artistic  construction,  I  have  already  in  the  Introduction  to  his  Prophecies  (§  3), 
confessed  that  Jeremiah's  style  is  not  deficient  in  art.  See  for  example  his  second  discourse, 
chs.  iii.-vi.  But  this  refinement  of  art,  this  acrostic,  this  adroit  periodic  versification,  these  in- 
genious transitions  in  iii.  19-21,  39-42,  this  crescendo  and  decrescendo  movement  resting  upon 

dence."  The  bare  fact  of  the  existence  of  the  words  referred  to  in  the  Septuagint,  a  translation  on  the  whole  so  faithful, 
and  made  by  Jews  who  almost  superstitiously  venerated  the  written  word  and  scrupulously  adhered  to  Hebrew  originals, 
is  some  evidence,  constituting  a  probability  at  least,  that  the  Septuagint  copied  these  words  from  Hebrew  MSS.  Then  again 
the  grammatical  structure  of  the  sentence  suits  the  assumption  that  it  is  a  translation  of  a  Hebrew  original.  The  general 
agreement  of  the  Vulgate  with  the  Septuagint  and  yet  the  difference  between  the  two,  Mfould  indicate  that  the  Vulgate  is 
not  a  mere  copy  of  the  Septuagint,  but  obtained  the  words  from  an  independent  source.  Even  Thenius  is  satisfied  with  the 
evidence  that  these  words  must  have  had  a  Hebrew  original,  and  feels  it  incumbent  upon  him  to  explain  why  they  are  not 
found  in  our  existing  Hebrew  Bibles.  Gerlach  :  "  Whether  the  Vulgate  derived  that  introduction  from  the  LXX.,  the  [addi- 
tional] words  being  added  or  having  fallen  out  of  the  text  of  the  LXX.  [since  the  Vulgate  was  written],  or  whether  both,  inde- 
pendently of  each  other,  reproduced  a  note  found  in  their  manuscripts,  is  of  no  importance,  since  the  grammatical  construc- 
tion of  the  words  in  either  case  refers  to  a  Hebrew  original,  which  preceded  both.  In  this,  to  be  presumed  Hebrew  original, 
we  have  to  recognize  the  oldest  tradition  concerning  the  author.  But  that  this  [superscription]  was  not  accepted  by  the  editors 
of  our  received  text,  cannot  be  explained  with  Thenius  by  the  assumption,  'that  it  was  not  regarded  as  satisfactory,  that 
those  editors  were  doubtful  at  least  whether  Jeremiah  had  composed  th&  first  song, — for  that  immediately  follows  after 
«ol  61776  [and  he  said].'  Since  this  superscription  could  have  no  other  object  than  to  connect  the  Lamentations  with  a  pre- 
ceding writing  (see  the  ko-'l  iyivero  k.  t.  A.  [and  it  came  to  pass,  etc.]),  and  that  writing  could  only  be  the  prophecies  of  Jere- 
miah, after  which  a  part  of  the  Jews  placed  them,  then  the  absence  of  the  superscription  in  those  manuscripts  which  place 
the  Lamentations  among  the  Hagiographa,  is  self-explained  and  nothing  less  than  proper." — W.  H.  H.] 

*  [Had  he  done  so  he  would  have  violated  no  rule  of  good  taste  or  propriety.  He  could,  moreover,  without  charge  or 
egotism,  direct  attention  to  himself,  because  he  was  the  prophet  of  .Tehovah  and  the  representative  of  pious  Israel  and  in 
his  sufferings  a  representative  of  the  Prophet  of  all  prophets  and  the  Head  of  Israel.  But,  in  fact,  there  is  not  a  word  ia 
the  whole  chapter,  that  any  good  man  might  not  have  writteuof  himself  without  a  breach  of  humility,  and  in  "the  brightly- 
shining  comfort-section  "  (vers.  22-42)  Jeremiah  hardly  alludes  to  himself  at  all.  That  part  is  not  in  the  first  person,  but  in 
the  third  person,  and  is  not  personal  to  the  prophet,  but  passes  beautifully  and  modestly  into  general  truths  of  universal 
•pplicallon.— W.  H.  H.] 


10  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


the  five-fold  division  of  the  whole  poem — truly  all  this  seems  not  like  Jeremiah.  In  his  writings 
nothing  similar  to  this  is  found.*  Would  any  one  ascribe  the  most  perfect  product,  in  regard 
to  the  external  artistic  structure,  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  to  that  same  prophet  whose 
style  is  elsewhere  characterized  as  sermo  incultus  el  pasne  subrusticus,  if  indeed  one  pauses  to 
recognize  his  style  at  all,  and  does  not  rather  direct  his  attention  to  those  rerum  coeleslium  mys- 
teria  which  are  concealed  under  the  sacramenlis  lilerarum  ?  Nevertheless,  I  freely  grant  that 
neither  the  psychological,  nor  the  rhetorical  argument  can,  by  itself  alone,  claim  to  be  deci- 
sive. 

But  another  argument  must  be  added  to  these,  namely.  Secondly,  The  prevailing  character 
of  the  language  in  the  Lamentation^.  This  differs  very  considerably  from  that  of  the  propheti 
cal  book.  Although  the  author  of  Lamentations  has  much  in  common  with  that  prophet,  not 
only  in  general  as  a  Hebrew  writer,  but  also  in  particular  by  a  designed  reference  to  the  writings 
of  Jeremiah,  yet  on  the  other  hand,  he  has  so  much  that  is  peculiar  to  himself,  and  so  much  that 
Jeremiah  has  not  at  all,  or  has  only  in  a  different  form,  that  it  is  difficult  to  believe  in  the  iden- 
tity of  the  two.  I  have  spared  myself  no  trouble  to  compare  every  word  of  the  Lamentations 
(with  the  exception  of  such  as  are  constantly  recurring,  as  n^n,  ty^X,  etc.,  without  which  Hebrew 
cannot  be  written)  with  the  writings  of  Jeremiah.  I  have  availed  myself  for  this  pur- 
pose of  the  Concordance  of  Fuerst,  and  have  found  the  same  correct  and  to  be  depended 
upon,  with  the  exception  of  what  is  given  in  respect  to  the  word  'J'lX.  The  following  is  the 
result  of  this  painfully  laborious  comparison,  wherein  I  refer  in  every  instance  for  authentica- 
tion to  the  exposition  of  the  passages  in  which  the  words  occur. 

[Note. The  bearing  of  the  argument  to  be  derived  from  the  verbal  differences,  between 

the  Prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  tho  Book  of  Lamentations,  is  critically  examined  in  the  Ap- 
pendix to  this  Introduction.  The  writer  of  this  note,  unwilling  to  msert  his  dissent  from  the 
very  learned  and  conscientious  author  of  this  Introduction  in  the  text  of  these  pages,  and  un- 
able to  condense  the  reasons  for  his  dissent  in  notes  at  the  bottom  of  the  pages,  would  here 
refer  the  reader  to  the  Appendix,  for  a  general  summary  of  arguments  in  confirmation  of  the 
opinion  that  Jeremiah  was  the  author  of  the  Lamentations.— W.  H.  H.] 

Chapter  I.  Ver.  1.  The  phrases  Dj;  "^1^  and  D;U5  n  occur  only  here.  The  singular 
mt^  as  an  appellative,  only  here.  nr"]p  is  not  foreign  to  Jeremiah's  times,  but  is  never  used 
bv  him      DdS  HD'H,  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  2.  'n*?  never  in  Jeremiah.     DHjp   J'N,  only  in 

-/  *  -  T          T :  It' 

this  chapter,  vers.  2,  9,  16,  17,  21,  and  in  Eccles.  iv.  1  (although  the  Piel  of  the  verb  Onj  occurs 
in  Jer.  xvi.  7 ;  xxxi.  13). — Ver.  3.  ^)V.  five  times  in  Lamentations.  Jeremiah  uses  neither 
it  nor  the  root  HJ;?.  See  iii.  33 :  v.  11.  For  3*1?  Jeremiah  says  31  hv_  or  313.  Hli^,  niJD 
(Jeremiah  says  nniJD),  U"}V^,  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  4.  '73N  never  in  Jeremiah,  "^^^p,  which 
occurs  in  Lamentations  six  times,  and  always  in  the  sense  of  a  time  or  place  of  a  festival,  is 
found  twice  in  Jeremiah,  but  both  times  in  the  general  sense  of  tempus  fixum.  The  expres- 
sions -"S  '»<3.  Opi'lJ'  (see  vers.  13, 16  ;  iii.  11),  the  termination  j""—  the  verbs  HJN  (see  vers.  8, 11) 
and  r\y  (four  times  in  Lamentations)  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  5.  1312^  '^r\  is  peculiar  to  this 
place.  The  sing.  "<V,  which  occurs  five  times  in  Lamentations,  is  never  in  Jeremiah.  He  uses 
only  the  plural.— Ver.  6.  ]0  xr  for  formken  only  here.  "inn.  Vn  (masc),  r\}^pp  (Jeremiah 
always  n';r"i5)  never  with  Jeremiah.  «]P  Jeremiah  uses  only  with  suffixes.— Ver.  7.  D"}nD, 
only  here,  iii.  19,  and  Is.  Iviii.  7.     ibnp  (see  vers.  10,  11 ;  ii.  4)  never  in  Jeremiah.     He  uses 

*  [Shall  we  doubt  whether  Shakspeare  wrote  Tarqiiin  and  Lucrece,  and  Venus  and  Adonis,  because  in  all  his  plays  there 
is  nothing  similar  to  the  very  artificial  construction  of  these  Spenserian  poems  ?  Can  we  expect  the  same  style,  the  mani- 
festations of  precisely  the  same  qualities  of  genius  in  a  formal  stately  poom,  like  those  meutioned,  and  in  the  free  unem- 
l-arrassed  composition  of  tho  stage  play?  Shall  we  expect  to  find  no  new  traits  of  genius  and  evidences  of  versatility  of 
tal.-nt,  when  the  orator-prophet,  who  has  electrified  Israel  by  his  impromptu  bursts  of  eloquence,  called  forth  by  passing 
events  and  pressing  emergencies,  sits  down  to  the  careful  composition  of  a  lyrical  dirge,  to  be  constructed  in  accordance  with 
pre-determined  artistic  rules?  It  is  possible  that  one  might  r,-ad  Tarquin  and  Lucrece,  and  say  that  its  author  was  incapa. 
We  of  writing  Shakspeare's  plays.  Another  might  read  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  say,  their  author  was  ino»pabU 
Of  producing  the  Lamentations.    Both  would  be  mistoken.— W.  H.  H.] 


g  3.  AUTHOR  AND  TIME  OF  COMPOSITION.  H 


only  •npn.  r\3tyD  an.  "key. — Ver.  8.  N£?n  (see  iii.  39)  never  in  Jeremiah.  He  uses  only  nxtsn. 
riTJ,  1330,  v'Tn  (only  here),  Hl^j;  never  in  Jeremiah.  Hnx  (see  ver.  13)  occurs  in  Jeremiah 
only  with  "^/n  or  JIDJ — Ver.  9.  HKOp   D'XTi)  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  10.  lOHD  never  in  Jere- 

J  '-T  T  t:-.  '-t:  t:- 

miah  (see  ver.  7).— Ver.  11.  njX  (see  ver.  4),  nbno  (see  ver.  7),  ^3«,  K^SJ  yvJr\,  1333  (see  vtr. 
12;  iii.  63;  iv.  16;  v.  1),  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  12.  '}'}'}_  '■?3ir  (see  ii.  15),  'liJN  jnn  DV  (is. 
xiii.  13)  never  in  Jeremiah.  See  ii.  1.  /Vl;?  (see  ver.  22;  ii.  20;  iii.  51)  Jeremiah  uses  only 
once  in  the  sense  oiracemari.  Once  also  in  Hithp.  xxxviii.  19. — Ver.  13.  ■H^?.-  nn  (see  v.  17) 
never  in  Jer. — Ver.  14.  Ipty  an.  ley.  J^i^ETl  Hithp.  only  here.  'J^X  in  Jeremiah  never  alone, 
but  always  joined  with  mil' ;  in  Lamentations  fourteen  times,  and  always  alone. — Ver.  15. 
hSd,  njt^'lD  N'lp,  na  never  in  Jeremiah.  ■'37  ^4  =11"^  only  here. — Ver.  16.  n''3'3  only  here.  DHJ? 
see  ver.  2.  "t^iiJ  ^TP,  see  ver.  11.  D'ppw,  see  ver.  4. — Ver.  17.  DnJO  px,  see  ver.  2.  HIJ 
(see  ver.  8)  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  18.  Hi)  rr^O  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  19.  713"*,  Piel,  J^U 
never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  20.  "^If,  see  ver.  5.  "^P^on  (see  ii.  11),  ""S^  '^SpA  never  in  Jeremiah. — 
Ver.  21.  nJNJ,  see  ver.  4.  onjD,  see  ver.  2.— Ver.  22.  •'3  'JsS  n;rn  nx3,  nnjK  never  in 
Jeremiah. 

Chapter  II.  Ver.  1.  3''j;^  an.  ley.  D'nn,  f]N  DV  (see  i.  12 ;  ii.  21,  22)  never  in  Jeremiah.— 
Ver.  2.  i^Z^,  Piel,  never  in  Jeremiah,  in  this  chapter  five  times.  Instead  of  /On  i<i  (see  ver. 
17)  Jeremiah  says  DHp  X'?.  3p^'  niNJ  only  here. — Ver.  3.  Jeremiah  uses  only  the  Niphal  of 
J^IJ.  '^X  '7?  never  in  Jeremiah,  linx  3"'E'n,  see  i.  8.  ytp\  Jeremiah  uses  only  once,  and  then 
not  in  a  figurative  sense.  Jeremiah  never  says  SOD  73X,  he  uses  in  this  connection  always 
D^T3p  or  nn^pp — Ver.  4.  3X:  Niph.  never  in  Jeremiah,  nonp,  see  i.  7,  10, 11.  {i'2f.  n3_  Snx 
only  here.— Ver.  5.  J^bp].,  see  ver.  2.  n^:xi  ^l^.^.^  from  Is.  xxix.  2.— Ver.  6.  I^ID,  see  i.  4.  n|l7 
Piel  only  here.  ^132?  in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  passage  xvii.  21-27. — Ver.  7.  HJT  never  in  Jere- 
miah ;  in  Lamentations  three  times,  ii.  7  ;  iii.  17,  31.  'J^X  see  i.  14.  "^XJ  in  no  form  in  Jere- 
miah.  "'"Jpr',  Hiph.  never  in  Jeremiah,  he  once  only  uses  the  Pual  (xiii.  19). — Ver.  8.  J^v3, 
see  ver.  2.     Jeremiah  does  not  use  the  Hiph.  of   /3X.     7n   never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  10.  "^SJ^ 

Sr  -T  •■  XT 

never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  11.  Hi^'DT  never  in  Jeremiah  ;  he  uses  only  Hl'm.  "1D"lDn  see  i.  20. 
"133,  liver,  never  in  Jeremiah.  '\0]l  (three  times  in  Lamentations  and  only  in  ch.  ii.,  namely, 
vers.  11,  12,  19)  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  12.  '^PJ?^'?,  see  ver.  11.  Hithp.  "^QPipT]  never  in 
Jeremiah. — Ver.  13.  rioi  Piel,  T]W  and  07^^"^'  ^3  (the  last  in  Lamentations  again  ver.  15) 
never  in  Jeremiah.  Jeremiah  never  constructs  Xi3"l  with  7. — Ver.  14.  Jeremiah  never  uses  the 
verb  nin  alone,  nor  Xlty  nin.  The  latter  is  an  expression  occurring  in  Ezekiel.  Also  /On,  for 
which  Jeremiah  says  nSpn  (xxiii.  13). — Jeremiah  never  uses  nbj  with  7^  (see  again  iv.  22). 
n'lXJJ/p  (chosen  with  reference  to  Jer.  xxiii.  33-40)  only  here.  Jeremiah  uses  Xlt:'  only  in  the 
formula  XlU^j.  DTinp  (probably  framed  with  reference  to  Jer.  xxvii.  10,  15)  is  an.  ley — Ver. 
15.  Jeremiah  never  says  D'33  p3D,  nor  ■^^T  '^pj;  (see  i.  12),  nor  K'XI  "STIT),  For  the  last  Jere- 
miah says  lyxip  TJll.  piK^n'  np,  see  ver.  13.  The  '^,  relat.,  never  in  Jeremiah  ;  in  Lamenta- 
tions four  times,  ii.  15,  16 ;  iv.  9 ;  v.  18.  'p'  ■f^!?"''?P  is  an  expression  of  Ezekiel's  (xxvii.  3 ; 
xxviii.  12).  >!^  is  never  found  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  16.  riV3  (see  iii.  46),  "^pT^  never  in  Jere- 
miah. ;'^3,  see  ver.  2.— Ver.  17.  .T'^S,  Piel  never  in  Jeremiah.  He  uses  only  J/Xp  ^If^^.  H^px, 
an.  Xey.  /DPI  X7l,  see  ver.  2.  "]pp.once  in  Jeremiah,  IP.p.  D")n  never. — Ver.  18.  nj13  (see  iii. 
49)  only  here.  J^-  ^^  only  elsewhere  in  Ps.  xvii.  8.— Ver.  19.  nnoK^X  K^X"),  sSjJBE^  D'3_3_Xtrj^ 
^1J3;;  (see  ver.  12)  never  in  Jeremiah.  niyin-S3  i:?X"i3  is  found  in  Nah.  iii.  10 ;  Isa.  Ii.  20 ; 
in   the   Lamentations   again   iv.  1 ;  in  Jeremiah   never. — Ver.  20.  no'pn"!  '"'■'  nxp,  see  i.  11. 


2-2  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

D'nata,  drr.  ?iey6fi.—Vev.  21.  ^X  DV,  see  vers.  22,  1.  n^^n  nS,  see  ver.  2.— Ver.  22.  "^^p,  see 
i.  4.     n3£3  only  here.     nS^,  Piel  never  in  Jeremiah.     '"  ^X  Dl'',  see  ver.  1. 

Chapter  III. — Ver.  1.  'JI^  (see  i.  3)  never  in  Jeremiah.  £3^2?  only  found  in  Jeremiah  in  the 
critically  suspicious  places,  x.  16 ;  li.  19.  ^ri^nj;  OT^,  from  Prov.  xxii.  8.— Ver.  2.  iT\2,  IjE/n, 
never  in  Jeremiah.  The  sentence  "'IX  kS  ijiZ'n  from  Am.  v.  18,  20;  Job  xii.  25.— Ver.  4. 
nSa,  rimiSil,  *l3i2^  (see  Isa.  xxxviii.  13),  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  5.  '\'p_y  nxSn  never  in  Jere- 
miah. K'X'i,  poison,  Jeremiah  uses  only  in  the  phrase  IS'X"!  'p, — Ver.  6.  D'S'^no  never  in 
Jeremiah.  dVi>'  'JIO  only  elsewhere  Ps.  cxliii.  3  ;  comp.  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  5-7. — Ver.  7.  "^l^  (see 
ver.  9),  TS^n  Hiph.,  never  in  Jeremiah.  XVN  xbl  only  elsewhere  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  9.  ^y^r\^  never 
in  Jeremiah  ;  he  uses  only  D^^E'nj. — Ver.  8.  }^l^^  Orw  (DnD)  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  9.  "1^1 
see  ver.  7.  ^"1^  H^i;?  Piel,  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  10.  3'n  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  11.  I^ID 
as  Pilel  from  I'D,  or  Poel  from  "1"]D,  only  here.  r\UB  is  also  a-,  ley.  DOViy,  see  i.  4.— Ver.  12. 
Xlt30,  in  the  sense  of  mark,  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  13.  nstyx  'J3  only  here. — Ver.  14. 
nj'JJ  never  in  Jeremiah,  see  ver.  63 ;  v.  14. — Ver.  15.  D'lno  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  16. 
D"^!,  V'^n  never  in  Jeremiah.     K'£33  ctt.  ^ev — Ver.  17.  njl  never  in  Jeremiah,  see  ii.  7 ;  Ps. 

-tItt  -t'  -t 

Ixxxviii.  15. — Ver.  18.  nvj,  in  the  sense  here  required,  and  ^(/n'lD  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  19. 
^iy,  see  i.  3.  DH^ID,  see  i.  7.  K'X'l,  see  ver.  5. — Ver.  20.  T\W  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  21. 
37-7X  yVT),  1T\\  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  22.  D'lDn,  plural,  never  in  Jeremiah,  see  ver.  32. — 
Ver.  23.  D"''ip37  never  in  Jeremiah;  he  uses  in  this  sense,  once  only,  *^p3Z- — Ver.  24.  "^^PX 
''ppi  only  here.  IT}"  never  in  Jeremiah,  see  ver.  21. — Ver.  25.  nip,  Kal  never  in  Jeremiah  ;  he 
uses  only  Piel  and  Niphal. — Ver.  26.  /Tl''  only  here.  Di^n  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  27. 
hj;  Xi7J  only  here.— Ver.  28.  ^7^3  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  29.  "ISJ^S  HS  \r\i  only  here.  13^. 
alone,  never  in  Jeremiah,  see  ii.  10. — Ver.  30.  n^p  Part.,  T}!  (see  i.  2),  never  in  Jeremiah. — 
Ver.  31.  njf  (see  ver.  17;  ii.  7),  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  32.  nr  (see  ver.  17 ;  i.  4,  5,12), 
^""l^tl.  Plural  (see  ver.  22)  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  33.  HJJ,',  in  this  sense  (see  v.  11),  as  well 
as  its  derivative  ""JJ^,.  nj'  (see  ver.  32),  K^'X 'JS,  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  34.  I'DX  never  in 
Jeremiah. — Ver.  35.  '•3  OSpD  filDH  |V7j;,  as  a  name  of  God  (see  ver.  38),  never  in  Jeremiah. 
—Ver.  36.  rii;^  (see  ver.  59)  never  in  Jeremiah.  'J^X,  see  i.  14.— Ver.  37.  "Tl'-M  "ion  from  Ps. 
xxxiii.  9.  "nx,  see  i.  14.— Ver.  38.  y^Z  see  ver.  35.— Ver.  39.  "j^X,  N£pn  (see  i.  8)  never  in 
Jeremiah.  Jeremiah  uses  'n  only  in  oaths. — Ver.  40.  K'Sn  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  41.  XE^J 
aaS  (see  ii.  19).  D'DtJ'3  bx,  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  42.  IJnj  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  43.  pD 
(see  ver.  44)  never  in  Jeremiah.  J?7^n  X7,  see  11.  2,  17,  21.— Ver.  44.  '^DD,  see  ver.  43.-— Ver. 
45.  TID  and  D'lXD,  as  substantives,  only  here ;  Jeremiah  expresses  these  ideas  otherwise.  3^p3 
never  in  Jeremiah  without  suf&x;  he  says  ^'in3. — Ver.  46.  See  ii.  16. — Ver.  47.  .nxi^n  only 
here. — Ver.  48.  jhs  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  49.  HJ^sn  an.  ley.  See  ii.  IS.— Ver.  50.  ^p_S2f 
never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  51.  nSVlj;,  see  i.  12. — Ver.  52.  1'l32f  never  in  Jeremiah.  D^n  ""TX 
only  here. — Ver.  53.  rip:^  never  in  Jeremiah  — Ver.  54.  '^'V-  IH  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  55. 
'"  DK^  Nip,  nrrinn,   never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.   56.  d"^;?-  nnn    never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  57. 

tIt  •    :  - '  -  T         T  T  : 

a^p.  Kal  Jeremiah  never  uses  :  nor  the  expression  J|X"ipN  DV. — Ver.  58.  The  plural  D'?"!  Jere- 
miah never  uses.  ^XJ  he  uses  once  in  the  participle. — Ver.  59.  nnjj;  only  here. — Ver.  62.  {'lUH 
never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  63.  np^p  only  here.  £0D],  see  i.  11.  nr  J.3p,  see  ver.  14 ;  the  word 
is  OTT.  Xsy Ver.  64.  SlDJ  3'12^ri  never  in  Jeremiah  ;  he  says  VlOJ  uhp.  UJl'T  nj^^jD  in  Jere- 
miah only  in  the  critically  disputed  passage  xxv.  14.— Ver.  65.  H^JO,  nSxn,  both  dir.  Acy— Ver. 
66.  Jeremiah  uses  only  Niphal  of  ipK'-   ^"  "'pt^  only  here. 


5  3.  AUTHOR  AND  TIME  OF  COMPOSITION.  13 


Chapter  IV.— Ver.  1.  DD;r,  i^m  (r\W)  in  this  signification,  DfO,  il/lp  'J3K,  never  in  Jeremiah. 

-    T  TT  TT  °  '  VV  .'I         ■      : 

ni:fin-S3  B^«1.  see  ii.  19. — Ver.  2,  nSd  only  here.     IJ3.  ^l^n:  Niph.,  never  in  Jeremiah.     Hty^^p 

T  '  T  T  •  T  -     :  •■•  -^  -I 

■^■f^'  'T  (see  iii.  64)  only  here.— Ver.  3.  yhr\,  1^,  10X  (Jeremiah  says  only  "'"IJ.P^)  never  in 
Jeremiah.  Cij^,  if  the  K'tib  were  right,  we  should  compare  Jere.  li.  14,  the  K'ri  |;^^  only  here. 
— Ver.  4.  '^jn  never  in  Jeremiah.  NOV  only  once  in  Jeremiah,  and  then  for  f<p^,  xlviii.  18. — 
Ver.  5.  C^l^P^  l^a  in   the  physical   sense,  J^VlB,  p^n.  flinS'^X,   never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  6. 

yi'}_  '102  only  here. Ver.  7.  pT.  "I'Tl  nn^  (as  a  verb)  never  in  Jeremiah,     ^^n   only  in  the 

phrase  2hr\  niJ  VIN.    mx,  D'yji3.  "^"20,  rriTJ  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  8.  "IK/n  Jeremiah  uses 

•T  TT       -T   I  VV  -T  •   •:  •-         t:-  '      ■^ 

only  once  in  the  Hiph.  "liriE^,  Ifllf,  only  here.  ^^3%  as  an  adject.,  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  9. 
^•relat.,  see  ii.  15.  3^  in  Jeremiah  only  xlix.  4,  and  in  another  sense.  n3=ljn  never  in  Jere- 
miah.—Ver.  10.  'Jnni,  drr.  ?.£}■.,  W3,  ni3,  IdS  (see  ver.  15),  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  11.  ^b' 

•T-:|-'  '-TTTT^ 

never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  12.  Sjn  '2V;\  n^  in  sing,  (see  i.  5,  7,  10),  ^'ixi  "IV  (see  Esth.  vii.  6), 
never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  13.  D'p'"7^'  ^1  only  here. — Ver.  14.  ^W='?J:^J  never  in  Jeremiah,  see 
Isa.  lix.  3.— Ver.  15,  ioS,  see  ver.  10.  ]*'J  only  here. — Ver.  16.  Of  pSn  only  the  Hiphil  is 
found  in  Jeremiah,  in  one  critically  doubtful  place,  xxxvii.  12.  ^'^'i^,  see  i.  11.  D'JS  Nti^J 
never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  17.  "TS^,  ^k.  ley. — }rp'v  X7  is  a  phrase  peculiar  to  Isaiah  (xlv. 
10);  Jeremiah  says  S'';;r  x'?  (ii.  11).— Ver.  19.  fr^  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  20.  nn 
^yax,  I-"  TTiyD,  riTIt!?,  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  21.  D13  "ibj^P  only  here,  m^'  m  no  form  in  Jere- 
miah.— Ver.  22.  "jiU^  cn  only  here.     ^Z  '^^^},  see  ii.  14. 

Chapteb  V. — Ver.  1.  tD'Sn^  see  i.  11. — Ver.  2.  For  pHJ  in  this  sense  Jeremiah  uses  3DJ,  vi. 
12. — Ver.  5,  "^X'^  /^>  HJ^n,  Pual  only  here,  ^l"',  in  the  sense  of  driving,  huntijig,  never  in 
Jeremiah. — Ver.  7.   73D  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  8.   p13  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  9.  3in 

-  T  I     -  T 

13n3n  only  here.— Ver.  10.  103,  l^iin,  n3;;bl,  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  11.  T\^V,  see  iii.  33.— 

T  :  •   -  ■'  -  T  -  T  T  :~'  T  t' 

Ver.  12.  nSn,  -nn,  never  in  Jeremiah.— Ver.  13.  "l"'"'^,  «"•  ?-"/— Ver.  14.   nrJJ,  see  iii.  14.— 

TT  -t'  I  :  ,  T        . 

Ver.  17.  nn,  see  i.  13. — Ver.  18.  W,  relat.,  see  ii.  lo.  D"7:;;ity,  YJJ}  Piel,  never  m  Jeremiah, 
who  always  expresses  these  ideas  in  other  words. — Ver.  19.  ITJ  "1^7  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver. 
20.  p.J<  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  21.  ly^n  never  in  Jeremiah. — Ver.  22.  "»xp~nj;  never  in 
Jeremiah. 

I  will  lay  no  stress  on  the  a-rra^  lEySneva,  which  are  included  for  the  sake  of  completeness  in 
the  above  catalogue.  But  besides  these,  there  remains  so  great  a  number  of  words,  expressions 
and  constructions  foreign  to  the  usual  language  of  Jeremiah,  that  I  know  not  how  the  conclu- 
sion can  be  escaped,  that  Jeremiah  could  not  have  written  the  Lamentations.  Or  how  may  it 
be  explained,  that  Jeremiah  never  uses  Y^''7<I^.'  never  "J'^X  alone  by  itself,  as  a  name  of  God,  and 
yet  that  the  latter  occurs  fourteen  times  in  the  Lamentations  ,  that  Jeremiah  never  uses  tD'^H, 
never  '^V  or  its  root  H^.  never  Urivd,  never  r\T,  nJX.  n3T,  N^on,  nOHD,  ^^2,  Son  xS,  13;;,  ^^J, 

•    T'.  T't  *•  '  TT  "T  -T  :     •*  T    :     ~  T    •  "    T  TT  '  T 

nin,  nV3,  T.wr\,  nrjl  Sn',  D'J3  Vmi,  never  ioS,  never  the  ty  relat.,  never  3ip3  without  a  suffi.x, 

TT  TT         'V  T      •  -T  -T  Tt'  T'  VI  V: 

whilst  all  these  expressions  occur  more  or  less  frequently  in  the  Lamentations  ?  And,  be  it  ob- 
served, these  expressions  are  not  of  so  specific  a  sort  that  their  omission  in  the  prophetical 
book,  and  their  employment  in  the  Lamentations,  would  be  explicable  from  the  nature  of  the 
subject  treated  of,  but  they  belong  for  a  great  part,  if  I  may  say  so,  to  the  home-costume  of  the 
writer,  which  he  always  wears,  of  which  he  avails  himself  more  or  less  unconsciously  and  un- 
designedly. 1.  ji  J 

Thirdly.  The  words  73^1  NIB?  ijS  >m  ^^X'aj,  ii.  14,  are  beyond  doubt  a  quotation  from  Ezekiel 
xii.  24  ;  xiii.  6,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  14,  15,  23  ;  xxi.  28,  34 ;  xxii.  28  ;  for  only  in  those  places,  and  no- 
where else  in  the  Old  Testament,  does  the  phrase  Xlt?  nin  in  connection  with    /3r\  occur.     The 

^  : T  TT  "T 

phrase  "'3''  ^T7?)  "•  15,  is  also  decidedly  Ezekiel's,  for  it  is  found  only  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  3  ;  comp. 


14  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

xxviii.  12,  and  nowhere  else.*  That  the  Lamentations  may  be  the  source  from  which  Ezekiel 
obtained  these  phrases,  no  one  can  believe  who  has  read  Ezekiel  in  the  places  referred  to  with 
attention.  For  in  those  places  (especially  in  chapter  liii.)  everything  is  so  peculiar  and  so  im- 
pressed, in  construction  and  expression, — as  where  he  uses  /Sn, — with  the  distinct  individuality 
of  Ezekiel,  that  a  borrowing  of  the  words  is  not  to  be  thought  of.  I  say  the  ivords,  for  that 
Ezekiel  had  in  mind  the  substance  of  Jer.  xxiii.,  cannot  be  doubted.  If  then  in  Lam.  ii,  14, 
15,  we  have  quotations  from  Ezekiel,  what  is  the  inference  with  reference  to  the  authorship  of 
our  Book  by  Jeremiah?  In  the  prophetical  book,  even  in  the  latest  parts  of  it,  we  find  no  trace 
of  the  adoption  of  Ezekiel's  phraseology.f  If  we  detect  this  here,  it  must  be  conceded  that 
Jeremiah  might  have  received  already  some  parts  of  Ezekiel's  Book  before  the  whole  was  fin- 
ished. Were  the  Jeremiac  origin  of  the  Lamentations  established  in  other  respects,  then  per- 
haps we  could  allow  this  particular  matter  to  pass  without  question.  But  since  the  differences 
in  language  strongly  shake  that  traditional  opinion,  we  are  obliged  to  say  that  a  quotation  from 
Ezekiel  in  the  Lamentations  argues  rather  against  the  opinion  that  Jeremiah  wrote  the  Lamen- 
tations, than  for  it.     See  further  below,  under  2d  general  head  of  this  section. 

We  are  therefore  compelled  to  decide  that  the  tradition  which  has  the  Septuagint  for  its  first 
representative  rests  on  no  solid  foundation,  and  is  in  opposition  especially  to  the  philological 
characteristics  of  the  book.  But  who  then  did  write  the  Lamentations  ?  We  can  take  it  for 
granted  that  the  author  must  have  been  an  eye-witness  of  the  incidents  related  in  his  book. 
For  he  speaks  with  such  warmth  of  feeling,  with  such  clear  insight  and  accurate  knowledge  of 
the  events  he  narrates,  that  it  is  evident  that  he  does  not  speak  of  matters  learned  at  a  distance 
and  through  others,  but  of  those  of  which  he  has  a  direct  personal  knowledge  and  experience. 
Especially  the  last  two  chapters,  which  have  a  more  prosaic  character  exactly  reflecting  the 
things  as  they  actually  were,  are  copious  in  details  which  seem  to  us  to  be  copied  from  life.  In 
chapter  fourth  the  author,  alluding  to  the  humiliating  sufferings  of  the  people,  in  order  to 
heighten  the  effect,  describes  the  Israelites  generally  as  the  nobility  of  the  nations,  and  then 
especially  singles  out  the  nobility  of  Israel,  and  contrasts  their  former  with  their  present  condi- 
tion. Since  he  thus  extols  the  nobility  of  his  people,  with  manifest  predilection,  yes,  enthusi- 
asm (see  iv.  7,  comp.  i.  6,  and  remarks  on  those  places),  and  since  in  this  connection  he  says 
nothing  at  all  of  the  culpability  of  those  high  in  rank,  which  Jeremiah  makes  so  eminently 
conspicuous  (Jer.  ii.  26  ;  v.  5,  25-28  ;  xxiii.  1,  2 ;  xxxiv.  19  ;  xxxvii.;  xxxviii.;  xliv.  17),  but 
on  the  contrary,  very  decidedly  blames  the  prophets  and  priests,  as  the  causers  of  the  misfortune 
(ii.  14;  iv.  13-15),  all  this  seems  to  indicate  that  our  author  belongs  to  the  order  of  the  D^^ 
[the  princes,  or  nobles]. J     In  this  opinion  we  are  strengthened  when  we  read-  the  description 

*  [Dr.  Naegelsliach  credits  himself  in  the  Preface  with  the  important  discovery  that  Lam.  ii.  14  is  a  quotation  from  Ezekiel. 
The  fact  that  this  is  a  new  discovery  is  suspicious.  May  he  not  have  mistaken  a  mere  coincidence  in  the  use  of  language 
for  a  citation  of  one  author  from  another '!  Our  suspicion  grows  into  certainty  when  we  find  that  a  quotation  from  Ezekiel 
in  this  passage  involves  the  necessity  of  an  absurd  and  impossible  translation  of  the  word  7i3ri, — "Thy  prophets  saw  for 

thee  falsehood  and  white-waslt .'"  As  regards  the  other  words  involved  in  these  supposed  quotations  in  ii.  14,  15,  there  is 
nothing  so  unique  or  remarkable  in  them,  but  that  they  might  have  occurred  to  any  two  different  writers.  But  even  if 
they  were  phrases  of  striking  peculiarity,  both  writers  might  have  borrowed  them  from  the  popular  dialect  of  the  day.  The 
American  people  gave  to  English  literature  in  our  last  war  many  words  and  phrases  that  have  since  appeared  simultaneously 
in  our  best  writers.  So  the  Jewish  people,  fearfully  awakened  from  the  delusions  into  which  their  false  prophets  had  be- 
trayed them,  may  have  cried  out  in  their  passion  XIK^  lin.  and  lamented  over  their  ruined  city  as  '•£3''  rn^/2>i  and 

Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah,  even  on  the  assumption  that  the  latter  had  not  seen  or  heard  the  prophecies  that  were  uttered  in 
Chebar,  may  both  have  adopted  the  phrases  that  were  passing  from  mouth  to  mouth.  We  ought  not  to  forget,  either,  that 
both  prophets  were  inspired  by  the  same  Spirit,  and  hence  coincidences  in  thought  and  expression  were  to  be  expected. 
Our  object  in  these  remarks  is  simply  to  show,  that  the  repetition  in  the  Lamentations  of  words  and  phrases  in  Ezekiel,  does 
not  presuppose  an  acquaintance  with  Ezekiel's  prophecies.  But  in  point  of  fact  Ezekiel's  prophecies  contained  in  chapters 
xii.  xiii.  xxi.  xxii.  were  in  all  probability  known  to  the  Jews  in  Palestine  almost  as  soon  as  published  inChaldea.  See  notes 
on  ii.  14,  15.— W.  H.  H.] 

t  [Wr  do  find  great  resemblances  in  phraseology  between  the  two ;  and  if  every  remarkable  expression  occurring  in  two 
Biithors,  must  be  in  one  of  them  a  quotation  from  the  other,  either  Jeremiah  quotes  Ezekiel,  or  Ezekiel  Jeremiah,  very  often. 
Ol<serve,  for  instance,  the  peculiar  use  of  nSu  in  the  semse  of  captivity,  and  the  use  of  symbolical  names,  especially  lipS. 
Jer.  1.  21  ;  Ezek.  xxiii.  23.— W.  II.  H.l 

X  ^This  In  not  complimiMitary  to  the-  author.     The  book  itself  furnishes  evidence  that  its  author  could  not  be   blinded  by 


I  3.  AUTHOR  AND  TIME  OF  COMPOSITION.  15 

iv.  17-20,  where  the  author  so  vividly  and  intelligently  describes,  as  only  an  eye  witness  could, 
the  king's  flight  and  his  capture.  He  must  therefore  have  been  one  of  the  king's  companiona 
and  belonged  to  his  court.  But  he  seems  himself  to  have  escaped  capture.  Else  he  had  shared 
the  fate  of  the  other  princes  captured  with  the  king,  who  according  to  Jer.  lii.  10,  were  put  to 
death  together  at  Riblah,  Since  he  was  not  captured,  neither  could  he  have  been  transported, 
but  must  have  joined  himself  to  the  company  of  those  remaining  in  the  land  who  afterwards 
fled  to  Egypt.     Hence  v,  9,  10  relate  to  his  personal  experience. 

2.  As  regards  the  Time  of  Composition,  chapter  second  at  least  must  have  been  written  after 
the  book  of  Ezekiel  was  known  :  for  vers.  14,  15  of  that  chapter  presuppose  Ezekiel  xii.,  xiii., 
xxi.,  xxii.,  xxvii.,  consequently  the  first  part  of  his  writings  (i.-xxxii )  at  least.  These 
verses  could  not  have  been  added  at  a  later  period,  for  they  were  necessary  to  the  completeness 
of  the  alphabet  from  the  first.  Still  less  could  the  whole  of  the  second  chapter  have  been  composed 
at  a  later  period,  for  the  whole  work,  based  from  beginning  to  end  on  its  five-fold  construction, 
was  in  fact  made  out  of  one  casting.  But  when  the  firsi  copy  of  Ezekiel's  writings  may  have 
reached  Egypt,  it  is  impossible  to  ascertain.  We  can  only  say  this  much,  that  the  latest  date 
mentioned  in  Ezekiel's  writings  is  the  27th  year  of  Jechoniah's  captivity  (Ezek.  xxix.  17). 
This  refers  us  to  the  year  571  or  570  B.  C,  and  consequently  to  a  period  about  which  time,  ac- 
cording to  the  greatest  probability,  Jeremiah's  death  occurred.  For  though  we  were  obliged  to 
show  [in  the  Commentary  on  Jeremiah,  lii.  31-34]  that  it  was  not  absolutely  impossible  for 
Jeremiah  to  have  lived  till  the  year  561,  B.  C,  yet  this  is  only  the  extremest  imaginable  pos- 
sibility. Much  more  likely  is  it  that  he  lived  only  till  about  the  year  570.  See  Intr.  to  Jere- 
miah, pp.  ix.,  xii.  But  Ezekiel,  even  if  he  received  his  last  revelation  in  the  year  571-570, 
must  after  that  have  consumed  some  time  in  finishing  the  composition  of  his  book,  and  more 
time  still  must  have  elapsed  before  a  copy  of  his  writings  could  come  from  Chebar  to  Egypt.* 
Besides,  is  it  credible  that  Jeremiah,  in  his  old  age  and  while  sufiering  every  affliction,  wrote  a 
book  so  artistic  in  its  construction,  and  so  full  of  sprightliness,  as  the  Book  of  Lamentations  is? 
It  can  as  little  be  inferred  from  iii.  4,  that  the  author  was  old,  as  it  can  from  iii.  27,  that  he  was 
youngi  But  the  freshness  and  vivacity  with  which  the  book  is  written,  and  the  labor  which  it 
has  cost,  make  it  improbable  that  it  was  written  by  an  aged  man  in  the  last  stage  of  his  vital 
powers. 

3.  That  the  five  songs  are  the  work  of  one  and  the  same  author,  is  evident  from  the  follow- 
ing facts  and  considerations:  (1.)  The  unity  of  the  plan,  proved  above.  (2.)  The  thrice  re- 
peated initial  word  HD'X,  in  i.  1 ;  ii.  1 ;  iv.  1.  For  it  would  be  indeed  remarkable  in  the  highest 
degree,  if  different  writers  had  begun  their  songs  with  precisely  the  same  word.  (3.)  The  simi- 
larity of  the  language.  Although  verbal  peculiarities  occur,  which  distinguish  the  songs  from 
each  other,  yet  a  common  language  prevails  in  all.  In  regard  to  the  first  point,  the  phrase 
DDJ?  r^  occurs  four  times  (i.  2,  9,  17,  21)  and  DHJa  pHT  once  (i.  6)  in  the  first  chapter,  and  in 
no  other :  njx:  three  times  (i.  4,  8,  11)  and  substantive  nnjK  once  (i.  22),  and  in  no  other  chap- 
ter; nailD  (nbnn)  three  times  in  the  first  (vers.  7,  10,  11),  once  in  the  second  chapter  (ver.  4); 
i?2^  five  times  in  the  second  chapter  (vers.  2,  5  bis,  8,  16),  and  exclusively  there ;  the  same  is 
true  of  ^ttjtj,  which  occurs  three  times,  although  in  different  forms,  in  ch.  ii.  (vers.  11,  12,  19) ; 
and  '\^  DV  occurs  three  times  in  ch.  ii.  (vers.  1,  21,  22),  and  only  there.  Each  of  the  following 
words  occurs  twice  in  ch.  iii.,  "inj  (vers.  7,  9),  E^K*!  (vers.  5,  19),  Vn'W  (vers.  21,  24,  comp.  vers. 

the  prejudices  of  rank,  nor  meanly  capable  of  exempting  his  own  rank  from  just  censure.  The  internal  evidence  is  in  favor 
of  the  opinion  that  he  was  himself  a  prophet  and  a  priest,  and  intimately  associated  with  the  nobility  of  the  land,  if  not  him- 
self a  noble.— W.  H.  H.J 

»  [It  is  here  assumed  that  Ezekiel's  prophecies  were  not  published  till  all  of  them,  or  a  large  portion  of  them,  had  been 
carefully  collated  in  book-form  and  that  then  they  were  formally  circulated.  The  modern  process  of  writing,  printing,  and 
publishing,  seems  to  be  in  the  writer's  mind.  In  fact,  probably,  each  prophecy,  whether  first  spoken  or  written,  was  instantly 
and  rapidly  communicated  to  all  the  Jews.  It  would  travel,  with  marching  armies  and  numerous  caravans,  to  Palestine, 
and  thence  by  various  channels  to  Egypt,  not  only  in  written  form,  but  repeated  orally  and  accurately  by  those,  who  in  thaj 
age  of  few  books  and  fewer  readers,  were  able  readily  and  exactly  to  memorize  all  that  their  prophets  and  poets  composed. 
It  may  be  proper  here  again  to  refer  to  the  fact  that  Ezek.  i.-xxiii.  was  certainly  complete  before  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  may  have  been  finished  a  year,  or  longer,  before  that  event.— W.  H.  H.] 


16  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

18,  26),  onon  (vers.  22,  32)  ^3D  (vers.  43,  44),  rii;r  and  nr\^y_  (vers.  36,  59).  In  ch.  iv.  loS 
occurs  twice  (vers.  10,  15).  In  ch.  v.  no  similar  repetition  of  characteristic  expressions  occurs. 
I  believe  that  these  more  frequent  repetitions  in  the  first  chapters  are  due  to  the  more  lavish 
expenditure  of  art,  for  which  those  chapters  are  remarkable.  Not  that  these  repetitions  are 
themselves  indications  of  art ;  they  are  rather  the  involuntary  consequence  of  that  constraint 
which  an  artificial  style  imposes  upon  the  writer.  As  the  Poet  becomes  better  accustomed  to 
the  artificial  form  in  ch,  iii.,  these  repetitions  decrease  in  number.*  To  the  same  cause  we  must 
ascribe  the  peculiarity  that  the  Divine  name  "'J'lX  occurs  only  in  the  first  three  chapters.  Up 
to  the  culmination  point,  which  we  recognize  in  the  middle  of  ch.  iii.  (vers.  19-40),  we  find  this 
Divine  name,  which  belongs  rather  to  grave  and  solemn  discourse,  thirteen  times,  and  after- 
wards in  the  cZecrescem/o  passage  it  occurs  only  once  (iii.  58). f  Apart  from  these  repetitions 
in  one  and  the  same  chapter,  which  prove  nothing  against  the  identity  of  the  author,  many 
characteristic  expressions  are  repeated  in  several  chapters,  a  fact  which  testifies  that  one  and  the 
same  style,  or  habit  of  speaking,  prevails  throughout  the  whole  Book.  The  following  expres- 
sions thus  occur.  T\i\  i.  4,  5,  12,  and  iii.  32,  33.  'JJ^,  i.  3,  7,  9,  and  iii.  1, 19.  HJ;^,  deprunere, 
iii.  33,  and  v.  11.  njl,  ii.  7,  and  iii.  17,  31.  nrjj,  iii.  14,  63,  and  v,  14.  Son  xb,  ii.  2,  17,  21, 
and  iii.  43.  nii'-in-S3  ^^m"^,  ii.  19,  and  iv.  1.  3iC3  {happy),  iii.  26,  and  iv.  9.  1^  (sing.),  i.  5, 
7,  10,  and  iv.  12.  t3'3n,  i.  11,  12 ;  iii.  63  ;  iv.  16 ;  and  v.  1.  ^H  H^J,  ii.  14,  and  iv.  22.  ryr\^ 
i.  13,  and  v.  17.  t^?,  relat,  ii.  15,  16  ;  iv.  9  ;  and  v.  18.  IJ^iO  {place  or  time  of  a  festivity),  i.  4, 
15,  and  ii.  6,  7,  22.  DDiiy,  i.  4,  13,  16,  and  iii.  11.  D'n-no,  i.  7,  and  iii.  19.  N£3n,  i.  8,  and  iii. 
39.  •:]1T  '13>,  i.  12,  and  ii.  15.  ^T^  ('^Vi;'),  i.  12,  22 ;  ii.  20,  and  iii.  51.  la-ipn,  i.  20,  and 
ii.  11.  "'in^  :iw,  i.  8,  and  ii.  3.  "lOHD  Obno),  i.  7,  10,  11,  and  ii.  4.  TO3,  ii.  16,  and  iii.  46. 
nj^iD  Onuisn),  ii.  18,  and  iii.  49.  'Vh.,  i.  2,  and  iii.  30.  "^3;;,  ii.  10,  and  iii.  29.  33^  mi,  ii.  19, 
and  iii.  41.  I  think  that  this  comparison,  which  contains  only  those  instances  that  are  most 
apparent  to  the  eye,  strengthens  the  principal  argument  for  the  identity  of  the  author  of  th« 
several  songs,  which  argument  consists  in  the  unity  of  the  plan  on  which  they  are  constructed. 

I  4.  Literature. 

We  have  the  Patristical  Commentaries  of  Theodoret  and  Epheaem  Syrus. — Jerome  has  not 
explained  this  Book.  The  short  Tractatus  in  Jeremine  Lamentationes,  which  is  found  under 
his  name  in  the  editions  of  his  works,  and  which  is  nothing  but  a  mystical  interpretation  of  the 
alphabet,  was  composed,  according  to  Ghisler.,  Sixtus  Senensis  and  Bellaemine  (see 
Ghislee.,  p.  6),  by  Khabanus  Maurus,  according  to  Ballarsius  and  others  (see  Vallars. 
Tom.  V.  p.  1011),  by  the  venerable  Bede.— The  book  of  Lamentations  was  held  in  high  esteem 

*  [We  must  wholly  dissent  from  any  such  explanation  of  these  repetitions.  To  do  so,  were  to  transform  some  of  the  most 
beautiful  and  impressive  passages  in  these  poems  into  blemishes,  that  betray  the  carelessness  or  the  want  of  skill  of  the  sa- 
cred writer.  There  are  few  instances  in  which  the  reasons  for  the  repetition  are  not  apparent :  none  in  which  we  cannot 
imagine  that  they  were  intended  for  rhetorical  or  poetical  effect.  The  constantly  recurring  theme  in  the  first  song,  then 
is  no  comforter,  or  she  has  no  comforter,  ia  one  of  the  master  strokes  of  a  great  poet.  This  emphasizes  again  and  again  the 
theme  of  the  whole  poem.  This  is  the  very  acme  of  the  distress  of  the  daughter  of  Jerusalem,  who  having  forsaken  her 
God,  now  siUeth  solitary,  herself  forsaken  both  of  God  and  men,  she  hath  no  comforter !  So  in  the  second  song,  the  day  of 
Bis  wrath,  and  the  frequent  recurrence  of  the  words  anger  and  lorath  serve  to  keep  in  view  the  one  great  thought  of  this 
particular 'song,  that  God  Himself  had  appeared  as  an  enemy  and  an  avenger.  Not  only  was  Jerusalem  as  a  forsaken  woman 
without  a  comforter,  God  had  turned  against  her.  He  had  destroyed  His  own  Zion  where  He  dwelt  among  His  people,  and 
all  that  they  suffered,  they  suffered  at  His  hand,  and  we  are  not  for  a  moment  allowed  to  forget  that  we  are  reading  of  what 
God  does  in  the.  day  of  His  wrath.  The  repetitions  in  the  first  chapter  of  that  tremulous  word  H  ]XJ,  till  we  seem  to  hear 
the  broken  sighs  of  priests  and  people,  yea,  and  of  the  forsaken  sufferer  herself;  and  in  the  second  chapter,  of  the  short  ex- 
pressive word  ]fl2,  till  we  understand  that  nothing  has  escaped  the  desolations  of  Heaven's  wrath,  that  everything  is  lite- 
rally and  utterly  suiaZ/ouied  up  or  consumed,  are  instances  of  that  masterly  art  by  which  a  great  poet  impresses  an  idea  on 
the  mind  by  a  single  word,  repeated  again  and  again,  with  increasing  emiihasis,  where  a  writer  of  inferior  ability  would 
weaken  the  force  by  dividing  it  among  many  words.  But  without  mulfipl.viiig  instances,  it  may  be  well  here  to  make  a 
gener.al  observation  wlii.li  will  apply  to  all  tliese  repetitions,  and  that  is  that  the  language  of  violent  passion,  and  ejipecially 
ef  grief,  is  always  broken  up  into  short  words,  and  indulges  in  the  frequent  repetition  of  them.— W.  H.  H.] 

•f-  [See  note  on  this  word  on  p.  32.1 


§  4.  LITERATURE.  17 


bv  the  Fathers.  Geegoet  Nazianzen  says  of  it  (in  his  Oral  prima  de  pace,  according  to 
Uhlslee.,  p.  4),  "  As  olten  as  I  take  this  book  into  my  hands,  and  am  engaged  in  reading  those 
Lamentations  (whenever  I  do  read  it,  I  desire  to  be  modest  in  the  enjoyment  of  prosperity),  my 
voice  choked  with  emotion  is  lost,  my  eyes  are  iilled  with  tears,  and  I  seem  to  see  the  very 
calamity  he  describes  and  lament  with  him  in  his  lamentations."  The  alphabetical  acrostio 
furnished  rich  material  for  allegorical  interpretation.  Thus  Cassiodoeus  (explic.  Ps.  xxiv.,  in 
GHiSLEE..p.  3),  says,  "  Jeremiah  bemoaned  the  captivity  of  Jerusalem  in  a  quadruple  alphabeti- 
cal Lamentation,  indicating  to  us,  by  the  sacrament  of  letters,  the  mysteries  of  celestial  things." 
— With  respect  to  Rabbinical  Commentators,  we  refer  to  those  mentioned  on  the  Prophet  Jere- 
miah, to  whom  we  must  add  Aben  Ezra. — There  is  a  Hebrew  Commentary  by  M.  Mendel- 
sohn, on  the  five  Megilloth,  with  the  title  OUin  D;;  nibjD  t^on  mK3l  'U2Wi^,  Wien,  1807. 

Of  later  Christian  Commentators  we  shall  in  general  speak  of  such  only  as  treat  of  this  book 
alone.  Paschasius  Radbeetus,  expositio  in  Lamentt.  JeremisE,  Colon.,  1532,  and  other  edi- 
tions.—[Bullingee,  Tigur.,  1575.] — Peteus  Figueieo,  Comment,  in  Lamentt.  Jer.  et  in  Mala- 
chiam  proph.,  Leyden,  1596. — [Calvin,  Prolog,  in  Threnos. — Oecolampadius,  Argent.  1558. 
ZuiNGLius,  1544  :  are  mentioned  in  Intr.  Jer. — To  this  list  Maldonatus  should  be  added.] 
— Maetini  Del-Rio  (a  Jesuit),  Comment.  Hteralis  in  Threnos,  Leyd.,  1608. — Jo.  a  Jestj 
Maria,  Lamentalionum  Jer.  interpreiatio,  Neapel,  1608.  Luc.  Bacmeistee,  explicatio  Thre- 
norum,  Rost.,  1603.  —  TKren.  Jer.  latine  vers,  notisqice  expl.  a  J.  H.  Fattenboeg,  1615  {di&s. 
academ.). — [Petee  Maetyr,  Tigur.,  1629.J — Taenov,  Comment,  in  Thren.,  Rostock,  1G42, 
Hamb.,  1707. — [C.  B.  Michaelis,  Notes  in  the  Uberiores  Adnot.  in  Hagiogr.  U.  T.  Libros,  by 
J.  H.  Michaelis  and  others,  Vol.  II.,  1730.] — Joh.  Theoph.  Lessing,  observationes  in  Tristia 
Jerem.,  Lips.,  1770. — Jeremia's  Klagegesdnge,  iihersetzt  und  mit  Anmm.  von  J,  G.  Boemel, 
mit  einer  Vorrede  begleitet  von  Heedee,  Weimar,  1781. — J.  F.  Schleussnee,  curse  crit.  et 
exeget.  in  Threnos  Jeremise  (in  Eichhorn's  Repert.  filr  bibl.  und  morgenl.  Literatur.,  P.  xii., 
Leipzig,  1783). — G.  A.  Hoeeer,  neue  Bearheitung  der  Klagegesdnge,  Halle,  1784. — Jeremia's 
Klagegesdnge,  ixbers.  und  mit.  Anmm.  von  Joel  Lcewe  u.  Aaeon  Wolfsohn,  Berlin,  1790. 
— Paeeatj,  Joh.  Heine.,  Threni  Jer.  philolog.  et  crit.  illustr.,  Leyden,  1790. — [J.  Hamon, 
Oomm.  sur  les  Lam.  de  Jeremie,  Paris,  1790. — J.  D.  Michaelis,  Obss.  philol.  et  crit.  in  Jerem. 
Vaticinia  et  Threnos,  Edidit  et  auxit  J.  P.  Schleusner,  Gotting.,  1793  (see  Intr.  Jer.). — J.  K. 
VoLBORTH,  Klagegesdnge  aufs  neue  ubers.,  Celle,  1795.] — Joh.  Otto,  dissert,  philolog.  critica 
ad  Thren.  Jer.  {prasside  C.  F.  Schnuerer),  Tubing.,  1795. — J.  F.  Gaab,  Beitrdge  zur  Erkl. 
des  sog.  H.  Lieds,  Kohelets  und  der  Klagelieder,  Tiib.,  1795* — J.  Melch.  Hartmann,  die 
Klagel.  d.  Jer.  iibers  [in  den  Blumen  althebr.  Dichtkunst  v.  JusTi),  Giessen,  1809. — [T.  A. 
Dereser,  Lie  Klagelieder  u.  Baruch,  aus  d.  Hebr.  u.  Griech.  ubers.  u.  erkldrt,  Frankf.  a.  M., 
1809.] — Die  Elegien  des  Jerem.  in  griech.  Versmass  getreu  ubers.  {von  Welcker),  Giessen 
1810. —  Threnos  Jer.  metrice  reddidit  notisque  illustr.,  C.  A.  Bjoen,  Havniae,  1814. — G.  Riegler 
die  Klagl.  des.  Proph.  Jer.  aus  dem  Hebr.  in's  Deutsche  iibers.  mit  Anmm.,  Erlangen,  1814. — 
Feanc.  Eedmann,  curarum  exegetico-criticarum  in  Jer.  Thren.  specimen,  Rostock,  1818. — C. 
P.  CoNZ,  die  Klagl.  d.  Jer.  (in  Bengel's  Archiv.,  Bd.  IV.  S.  146  ff.).  Tub.,  1821.— Theod. 
Fritz,  novi  in  Thr.  Jer.  Commentarii  specimen,  exegesin  Cap.  i.  exhibens.  Dissert,  theol.,  Argent., 
1825. — [E.  F.  C.  RosENMUELLER,  Lat.  trans,  and  notes  in  his  Scholia  in  V.  T.  pars  8.,  Vol.  ii., 
1827.  See  Intr.  Jer.] — Spoesen,  Threni,  etc.,  suethice  cum  adnott.  philolog.,  Lund.,  1828. — 
GoLDWiTZEE,  Vebersetz.  mit  Vergl.  der  Sept.  und  Vulg.  und  krit.  Anmm.,  1828.— [Maueer, 
Aotes  in  his  Comm.  gram.  crit.  in  V.  T,  1835,  691-708.  See  Intr.  Jer.]— C.  A.  H.  Kalkae, 
Lamentt.  crit.  et  exeg.  illustr.,  Hafniae,  1836. — Wiedenfeld,  Uebers.,  Elberfeld,  1838. — Tan- 
chumi  Hieeos.,  commeniaritis  arabicus  in  Lamentt.  e  cordice  unico,  Bodleiano  ed.  Cureton 
London,  1 843. — [A.  Hetzel,  Die  Klagelieder  in  deutsche  Liederform  iibertragen  mit  erkl.  anmm. 
1854.]— Thenius,  m  kurzges.  exeg.,  Hdb.,  1855.  Vaihingee,  1857. — [Neumann,  Jeremias  u, 
Klagelieder,  1858.] — Die  Thrdnenlieder  des  Proph.  Jerem.  Eine  bibl.  Studie  von  H.  Beckh. 
In  der  Zeitschr.  f.  Prot.  u.  K.  Marz,  1861.  See  the  "  Lebensbild  des  Proph.  Jeremia,"  attri- 
buted to  the  same  author,  in  the  Deuischen  Zeitschr.  f.  Christl.  Wiss.  etc.,  1859,  Nr.  19-21.— 
F-wald  in  den  Dichtern  des  A.  B.  Theil.  i,  zweite  Halfte,  S.  321  ff.,  1866.— Z)je  Klagel.  Jer. 
ubers.  u  ausgel.  v.  WiLH.  Engelhaedt.  Leipzig,  Teubner,  1867.— [Die  Klagelieder  Jeremia 


18  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

erkldrt  von  Dr.  Ernest  Gerlach,  Berlin,  1868.  A  very  valuable  commentary,  published  about 
the  same  time  with  this  volume  of  Lange. — "  Other  translations  which  deserve  mention  here,  but 
which  embrace  either  the  poetical  books  or  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament,  are  those  of  Dathe, 
DeWette,  Cahen,  Meier,  and  H.  A.  Perret-Gentil  {La  Sainte  Bible,  Paris,  1866,  publ. 
by  the  Societe  biblique  protestante  de  Paris)."  Smith's  Diet.  Bible,  Am.  ed.,  art.  "Lamenta- 
tions," note  by  "A." — W.  H.  H.] 

[English  Translations  and  Commentaries.  William  Lowth,  Commentary  upon  the  Prophe- 
cies and  Lametilations  of  Jeremiah,  London,  1718,  and  Benjamin  Blayney,  Jeremiah  and 
Lamentations.  A  new  translation  with  notes  critical,  philological  and  explanatory,  Oxt'ord, 
1784;,  are  referred  to  by  Dr.  Naegelsbach,  in  the  Introduction  to  Jeremiah's  Prophecies. — 
"  Jeremy  the  Prophet,  with  the  Song  of  Moses,  translated  by  George  Joye  in  the  month  of  May. 
Svo.  1534  :" — "  The  Wailings  [i.  e.  the  Lamentations)  of  the  Prophet  Hierimiah,  done  into 
English  verse  by  Geo.  Drant,  Lond.,  Thomas  Marshe,  1566  : — The  Lamentations  of  Jeremy 
with  noteSf  by  Hugh  Broughton,  no  place,  nor  printer's  name,  4to,  1608 :"  are  mentioned  in 
Clarke's  "  Concise  view  of  the  succession  of  sacred  Literature."  The  last  is  preserved  in 
"The  works  of  the  Great  Albio7iean  Divine,  renowned  in  many  nations  for  rare  skill  in  SalenVs 
and  Athens'  Tongues,  and  familiar  acquaintance  with  all  Rabbinical  Learning,  Mr.  Hugh 
Broughton  ;  collected  into  one  volume,  and  digested  into  four  Tomes.  London,  printed  for 
Nath.  Ekins,  1662."  The  Preface,  containing  life  of  H.  Broughton,  is  signed  John  Lightfoot. 
The  translation  is  one  of  the  first  into  English  directly  from  the  Hebrew,  and  is  characterized  by 
great  simplicity  and  force,  and  an  agreeable  musical  rhythm.  The  notes  are  curious,  but  of 
little  exegetical  value,  and  abruptly  terminate  with  the  sixth  verse  of  the  second  chapter,  as  if 
the  author  tired  of  them,  for  he  closes  with  this  singular  remark  :  "  And  further  large  comment- 
ing I  shall  not  need.  The  learned  in  Ebrew  upon  a  warning  may  by  mine  examples  search 
how  still  from  other  holy  writers  Jeremy  fetches  his  phrases." — The  very  valuable  Anriotations 
of  Westminster  Assembly,  contributed  by  John  Gataker,  about  1642. — Nearly  the  whole  Book 
of  Lamentations  is  "  metrically  analyzed  and  translated  "  in  a  work  showing  considerable  know- 
ledge of  Hebrew  and  a  very  weak  judgment,  called  Hebrew  Criticism  and  Poetry,  by  George 
Somers  Clarke,  D.D.,  London,  1810. — "  The  Calvin  Translation  Society,"  in  Vol.  V.  of  Cal- 
vin's Commentaries,  Edinburgh,  1855,  have  given  us,  besides  the  valuable  Commentary  on 
the  Lamentations,  a  metrical  version  in  English  of  Calvin's  Latin  Version;  the  translator 
and  editor,  Rev.  John  Owen,  Vicar  of  Thrussington,  and  rural  Dean,  Leicestershire,  has 
added  many  notes  of  his  own,  and  sometimes  gives  us  a  new  translation  from  the  Hebrew. 
The  quotations  from  Calvin's  Commentary  in  the  following  pages,  made  by  the  present  trans- 
lator, are  all  taken  from  Owen's  translation,  without  reference  to  the  original. — '^The  Holy 
Bible  .  .  .  now  translated  from  corrected  texts  of  the  original  Tongue,  and  with  former  trans- 
lations diligently  compared,  .  .  .  by  B.  Boothroyd,  D.D."  London,  1853.  Boothroyd  in  the 
translation  of  the  Lamentations  has  copied  too  closely  the  translation  of  Blayney,  which 
with  all  its  excellencies,  is  often  fanciful  and  sometimes  rests  on  merely  conjectural  changes 
of  the  received  text :  Boothroyd  aflFords  little  exegetical  help  in  his  brief  notes,  many  of 
which  are  unmarked  quotations  from  Blayney. — Deservedly  better  known  is  the  transla- 
tion from  the  original  Hebrew  and  Commentary,  by  E.  Henderson,  D.D.  London,  1851 — The 
"  American  Unitarian  Association,"  has  furnished  us  with  a  new  translation  of  Lamentations, 
with  notes,  by  George  R.  Noyes,  D.D.,  Vol,  2d  of  the  Hebrew  Prophets.  3d  edition.  Boston, 
1866.  The  notes  are  good,  but  meagre  and  insufficient.  The  translation  generally  is  marked 
by  taste  and  good  judgment,  but  sometimes  indicates  haste  and  absence  of  careful  study. — The 
notes  of  Chr.  Wordsworth,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  in  Vol.  V.,  Part  IL,  of  his  ''  Holy  Bible, 
in  the  authorized  version,  with  notes  and  introductions,"  London,  1869,  make  us  wish  that 
they  were  more  numerous  and  more  extended. — W.  H.  H.] 

Of  Homiletical  Treatises,  should  be  mentioned  the  Condones  in  Thren.  Jer.,  by  the  Francis- 
can Joh.  Wild  (Ferus),  Colon.,  1570;  but  especially,  the  admirable  and  frequently  found 
Seventeen  Sermons,  which  were  delivered  by  Egid.  Hunnius,  at  that  time  Professor  in  Mar- 
burg, in  the  year  1585,  at  Frankenberg  in  Hesse,  to  which  place  the  University  was  removed 
'j-om  time  to  time  on  account  of  the  plague,  and  which  were  afterwards  published  under  the 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  I'J 

title  of  "  Die  Klagelieder  des  h.  Proph.  Jer.  ausgelegt  u.  erJd.  zu  Frankenberg,  in  17  Predig- 
ten,"  etc.     First  ed.,  1588.     I  have  the  third  edition :  Frankfurt  a.  M  ,  1600. 

ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP. 

BY  W.  H.  H. 

The  commonly  received  opinion  that  Jeremiah  was  the  author  of  the  Lamentations  is  sua* 
tained  by  the  following  considerations : 

1.  The  presumptive  probability  that  Jeremiah  was  th6  author  is  strong.  Dr.  Naegelsbach 
concedes  its  force  (see  p.  9). 

Jeremiah  survived  the  fall  of  the  city  long  enough  to  have  written  this  book.  The  authentic 
records  of  his  history  close  with  his  residence  among  the  Jewish  fugitives  in  Tahpanhes,  Egypt 
(Jer.  xliii.  8).  Whether  we  accept  the  early  Christian  tradition  that  "  the  Jews  at  Tahpanhes, 
irritated  by  his  rebukes,  at  last  stoned  him  to  death  "  (Smith's  Bib.  Did.),  or  the  report  that 
he  was  "  put  to  death  by  king  Hophra  "  (Milman's  Hist,  of  the  Jews) ;  or  adopt  the  more  likely 
belief  of  the  Jews,  "  that  on  the  conquest  of  Egypt  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  he  with  Baruch  made 
his  escape  to  Babylon  or  Judea  and  died  in  peace,"  having  lived  to  add  the  last  words  appended 
to  his  prophecies,  Jer.  lii.  31-34  (see  Smith's  Bib.  Diet.,  art.  "  Jeremiah,"  Stanley's  Jewish 
Church,  Series  2d,  p.  620), — it  is  at  least  certain,  that  Jeremiah  survived  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  long  enough  to  have  written  the  Lamentations,  which  include  historical  facts  not 
complete  till  after  the  death  of  Gedaliah  and  the  flight  to  Egypt.  Surviving,  it  is  next  to  in 
credible,  that  he,  the  prophet  of  the  destruction,  should  not  be  the  author  of  this  poem  ot 
lamentation  over  the  great  event  and  issue  of  his  prophetical  career.  Who  can  read  first  his 
prophetical  book  and  then  this  description  of  the  city  and  the  people  after  the  destruction  of  the 
former,  and  not  say, — if  Jeremiah  still  lived,  Jeremiah  and  no  other  was  the  painter  of  this 
picture,  in  which  all  the  conspicuous  figures  are  what  his  former  writings  would  lead  us  to  ex- 
pect, which  presents  an  exact  fulfilment  of  all  he  predicted,  and  which  so  corresponds  with  the 
doctrine,  facts  and  previsions,  contained  in  the  prophetical  book,  that  when  we  turn  from  one 
to  the  other,  it  is  difficult  to  say  which  picture  is  most  like  the  reality, — which  is  the  mirror 
that  most  accurately  reflects  the  downfall  of  the  State  and  the  dispersion  of  the  people !  "  The 
poems  belong  unmistakably  to  the  last  days  of  the  kingdom,  or  the  commencement  of  the  exile. 
They  are  written  by  one  who  speaks,  with  the  vividness  and  intensity  of  an  eye-witness,  of  the 
misery  which  he  bewails.  It  might  almost  be  enough  to  ask,  who  else  then  living  could  have 
written  with  that  union  of  strong  passionate  feeling  and  entire  submission  to  Jehovah,  which 
characterizes  both  the  Lamentations  and  the  Prophecy  ot  Jeremiah  ?"  (Smith's  Bib.  Diet.  art. 
Lament.).  Who  can  believe  that  Jeremiah,  after  continuing  to  speak  and  write  for  God  through 
a  long  life-time,  so  suddenly  dropped  the  pen  and  remained  silent  and  suffered  a  total  eclipse 
from  the  splendor  of  an  unknown  author,  to  whose  identity  neither  Scripture  nor  tradition  give 
us  the  slightest  clue  ? 

2.  The  presumption  that  Jeremiah  wrote  the  Lamentations  is  confirmed  by  the  most  decisive 
testimony  of  tradition. 

Few  historic  facta  are  sustained  by  a  tradition  so  ancient,  so  long  undisputed  and  so  generally 
received.  The  truthfulness  of  this  tradition  was  never,  we  may  say,  seriously  questioned  till 
the  middle  of  this  century,  when  Ewald  gave  his  verdict  against  it.  Up  to  that  time,  with  the 
exception  of  an  anonymous  writer  in  1819,  and  the  whimsical  Von  der  Haardt  in  1712,  it 
was  universally  accepted  by  Jews  and  Christians.  We  trace  it  back  through  the  Vulgate,  the 
Syriac  and  the  Septuagint  versions,  to  the  probable  evidence  of  Hebrew  MSS.  earlier  than  the 
oldest  of  those  versions  (see  note  p.  8).  The  existence  of  such  Hebrew  MSS.  is  entirely  pro- 
bable. It  is  easier  to  account  for  the  loss  of  what  once  were  the  connecting  words  between  the 
Prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  the  Lamentations,  by  the  transfer  of  the  latter  to  the  Hagiographa, 
than  it  is  to  explain  the  insertion  of  the  words  in  the  Septuagint  and  their  reproduction,  with 
additions  and  changes,  in  the  Vulgate,  if  they  never  existed  in  Hebrew  originals.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  suppose  that  the  Septuagint  translators  inserted  in  the  text  a  mere  presumption  of  their 
own,  "  derived  from  the  book  itself,"  as  Dr.  Naegelsbach  suggests.     If  it  could  be  proved  that 


20  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


they  did  not  find  these  words  in  Hebrew  MSS.,  we  must  believe  that  they  received  them 
through  written  or  oral  tradition,  that  had  descended  to  them  from  earlier  ages  and  was,  in  their 
times,  universally  accepted  and  undisputed.  It  is  not  credible  that  such  a  tradition  could  have 
been  founded  in  error.  When  and  how  could  an  error,  in  reference  to  the  authorship  of  this 
book,  have  come  into  universal  acceptation  previous  to  the  translation  by  the  Seventy?  It  is 
asserted  that  other  writings,  of  unknown  authorship,  were  attributed  by  the  Jews  to  Jeremiah 
(Smith's  Bib.  Did.;  Stanley's  Jewish  Oh.).  But  there  is  no  evidence  of  their  having  attri- 
buted to  him  a  canonical  book,  that  had  always  been  esteemed  canonical,  and  had  never  been 
lost  sight  of  or  forgotten.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  this  book  was  highly  valued  by  the 
exiled  Jews,  and  was  in  their  possession  on  their  return  from  captivity  (Smith's  Bib.  Diet.,  art. 
Lam.).  From  that  time  to  the  time  of  the  translation  of  the  LXX.,  the  Jews,  cured  of  idola- 
try, cherished  their  sacred  Scriptures  and  especially  revered  the  memory  and  the  words  of  the 
prophet  Jeremiah.  During  this  long  period,  we  can  fix  upon  no  point  of  time,  when  the  true 
history  of  this  extraordinary  book  could  have  been  lost,  when  the  brilliant  name  of  its  real 
author  could  have  lapsed  into  oblivion,  or  when  the  fable  could  have  been  fabricated,  that  was 
destined  to  be  universally  accepted  as  a  historic  truth,  that  Jeremiah  was  that  author. 

3.  The  facts  related  or  referred  to  in  the  book  render  it  certain  that  Jeremiah  wrote  the 
book. 

We  have  already  ascertained  that  he  lived  long  enough  after  the  events  alluded  to  had  hap- 
pened, to  have  written  about  them.  We  have  also  intimated  that  the  topics  discussed  or  sug- 
gested in  the  Lamentations  are  exactly  what  we  would  expect  to  find  in  a  writing  of  Jeremiah's, 
composed  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  To  this  we  now  add,  that  the  assumption  that 
the  Lamentations  were  written  by  one,  who  had  been  both  a  spectator  of  the  events  described 
and  a  participator  in  those  events,  points  directly  to  Jeremiah  as  the  probable  author  of  the  book. 
This  assumption,  indeed,  is  not  inevitable  ;  for  not  all  graphic  descriptions  of  events  are  writ- 
ten by  those  who  participated  in  them  :  what  eye-witness,  for  example,  could  bring  the  reader 
more  immediately  into  the  presence  of  actors  and  scenes  far  remote  from  the  writer,  than  Dean 
Stanley,  who  has  given  us  his  eloquent  version  of  the  same  incidents  in  Jewish  history?  But 
granting  the  assumption  in  the  present  instance,  who  could  have  been  a  more  authentic  writer 
of  the  facts  contained  in  the  Book  of  Lamentations,  than  the  prophet  Jeremiah  ?  Or  what  great 
event  is  described  in  that  Book,  that  was  not  witnessed  and  participated  in  by  the  prophet  Jere- 
miah ?  Dr.  Naegelsbach  suggests  only  one  possible  exception  ;  he  would  infer,  from  the 
description  of  the  flight  irom  Jerusalem  and  the  pursuit  and  capture  of  the  king  and  the  princes, 
that  the  author  of  Lamentations  was  a  companion  of  the  king  and  one  of  the  princes  of  the 
court.  To  this  we  answer  ;  1st.  There  is  no  intimation  that  even  one  of  those  princes  escaped 
the  slaughter  at  Riblah  •  "  and  the  king  of  Babylon  slew  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  before  his  eyes  :  he 
slew  also  all  the  princes  of  Judah  in  Riblah."  2d.  There  is  absolutely  nothing,  in  the  brief  allu- 
sion in  the  Lamentations  to  the  flight  and  capture  of  the  king,  that  indicates  that  it  was  written 
by  a  companion  of  the  king.  The  only  possible  reference  to  this  tragical  incident  is  contained 
in  two  verses,  iv.  19,  20.*  The  19th  verse, — "Our  persecutors  are  swifter  than  the  eagles  of  the 
heaven ;  they  pursued  us  upon  the  mountains,  they  laid  wait  for  us  in  the  wilderness," — is  in  no 
sense  personal  to  the  writer,  nor  is  its  application  to  be  restricted  to  the  king  and  his  army;  but 
is  spoken  with  reference  to  the  whole  people,  as  the  preceding  verses  show,  and  refers  to  the 
rapid  pursuit  of  all  fugitives  from  the  city,  whether  they  endeavored,  like  the  king,  to  find 
safety  in  the  mountains  of  Jericho  or  the  wilderness  of  Judea,  or  in  any  other  mountains  or 
wildernesses  in  the  vicinity  of  the  doomed  city.  The  first  member  of  ver.  20, — "  the  breath  of  our 
nostrils,  the  anointed  of  the  Lord,  was  taken  in  their  pits, ^' — simply  states  the  fact  of  the  king's 
capture,  without  any  incidental  detail,  such  as  would  indicate  a  description  of  the  event  by  an 
eye-witness;  and  the  second  member  of  this  verse, — "o/  whom  we  said.  Under  his  shadow  we 
shall  live  among  the  heathen,^' — is  the  language  of  the  people  generally,  not  of  the  companion.s 
of  the  king  only,  for  the  desire  of  the  nation  doubtless  was,  that  their  king  should  escape  to  some 
place  of  security,  even  among  the  heathen,  whither  they  might  follow  him,  and  where  they 

•  See  notes  ou  it.  17-20,  and  m>tv  at  end  of  cb.  iv. 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON"  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  21 


might  gather  around  him  and  perpetuate  their  monarchy  and  nationality.  There  is,  then, 
nothing  in  these  two  verses  to  embarrass  the  conclusion  that  Jeremiah  wrote  the  Lamenta- 
tions. 

Having  shown  that  there  is  nothing  in  this  Book  involving  the  personal  experience  and  ob- 
servation o{  the  author,  that  renders  ii  impossible  for  Jeremiah  to  have  been  that  author,  we 
come  now  to  the  fact,  that  there  is  much  in  this  Book  which  belongs  peculiarly  and  exclusively 
to  the  personal  history  of  that  prophet.  This  is  especially  true  of  the  third  chapter  or  song. 
Here  we  clearly  have  the  prophet  Jeremiah  speaking  to  us.  Dr.  Naegelsbach  himself  is  com- 
pelled to  acknowledge  this.  But  he  says  that  the  writer  of  the  Book  personifies  the  prophet 
and  puts  these  words  into  his  mouth.  Who  can  believe  this  ?  Who  could  justify  the  sudden 
intrusion  of  anew  speaker  into  such  a  finished  composition,  without  a  hint,  either  preceding 
or  following  his  soliloquy,  as  to  his  name,  rank,  or  official  position?  Who  would  imagine  that 
any  intelligent  author  would  attempt  such  an  abrupt  assumption  of  another  man's  personality? 
Who  can  believe  in  the  possibility  of  such  a  complete  identification  between  an  author  and  a 
character  dramatically  introduced  into  his  poem  ?  Either  Jeremiah  wrote  the  whole  poem,  or 
he  wrote  no  part  of  it.  If  he  wrote  the  whole,  the  3d  chapter,  beginning  with  the  words  "  I  am 
the  man  thai  hath  seen  affliction,"  is  natural,  lucid  and  appropriate.  If  Jeremiah  did  not  write 
the  poem,  this  third  chapter  is  certainly  intended  to  deceive  us  into  the  belief  that  he  did.  Other- 
wise, it  is  an  anomaly  and  solecism  in  literature,  that  no  reputable  writer  could  be  guilty  of. 
The  argument  that  a  modest  man  would  not  make  himself  the  central  object  in  his  own  poem, 
is  of  no  force;  especially  when  we  remember  that  the  poet  is  also  the  prophet  of  Jehovah,  and  not 
only  on  that  account  a  representative  man,  but  a  living  prophecy  in  his  own  life,  as  Rosea  was. 
Besides,  the  argument  may  be  offset  by  another  consideration,  that  a  poet,  as  skilful  as  the  au- 
thor of  Lamentations  was,  would  not  leave  us  to  guess  who  the  central  figure  of  his  poem  is,  by 
the  mere  accidental  coincidences  of  historical  details.  Indeed,  we  find  in  this  absence  of  his-name 
and  titles  the  best  evidence,  that  the  modest  Jeremiah  was  himself  the  author;  for  if  another 
had  written  the  Book,  he  would  have  had  every  inducement  to  tell  us,  that  the  great  and  holy 
prophet  Jeremiah  was  the  speaker  in  this  3d  Song.  The  whole  argument  for  modesty,  however, 
is  greatly  overstrained,  and  receives  no  support  from  the  free  and  frank  way  in  which  Jeremiah 
speaks  of  himself  in  his  prophecies. 

4.  Characteristics  and  similarities  of  style  add  still  further  evidences  to  the  fact  that  Jere- 
miah wrote  the  Lamentations. 

Arguments  derived  from  style  are  precarious.  The  investigations  into  the  authorship  of 
Junius  admonish  us  that  the  most  astute  critics  may  be  deceived,  and  that  it  is  possible  for  an 
author  to  excel  himself  in  one  single  production  beyond  the  recognition  of  his  most  intimate 
and  sagacious  friends.  In  the  present  instance,  we  encounter  the  difficulty  of  determining  what 
are  the  general  characteristics  of  Jeremiah's  style.  Till  the  critics  decide  this  point,  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  Lamentations  harmonize  with  his  style  must  be  demurred.  "  Jerome  com- 
plained of  a  certain  rusticity  in  Jeremiah's  style,"  an  idea  that  Naegelsbach  seems  to  accept 
(See  p.  12.  Sertno  incultus  et  pene  subrusticus.)*  Lowth  confesses  that  he  can  discover  no 
vestige  of  this  rusticity,  he  thinks  that  in  several  of  his  prophecies  he  "approaches  very  near  the 
sublimity  of  Isaiah,"  he  regards  Ezekiel  as  "  much  inferior  to  Jeremiah  in  elegance  "  {Sacred 
Poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  Gregory's  translation,  IL,  pp.  88,  89).  Lowth  also  compares  him  to 
feimonides ;  and  Seb.  Schmidt  compares  him  to  Cicero  (Smith,  Bib.  Die,  Art.,  Jeremiah). 
Bishop  Wordsworth,  speaking  of  him  as  "  peculiarly  the  prophet  of  the  affections,"  calls  him 
"the  Euripides — and  more  than  the  Euripides — of  the  Hebrew  canon"  (Introduction  to  Jere- 
miah, p.  XV.). — There  is  again  a  conflict  of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  merits  of  the  Lamentations 
as  a  work  of  art  and  taste.  Ewald  speaks  of  it  slightingly  as  possessing  some  merit.  Notes  al- 
most reproduces  Ewald's  language,  when  he  says,  "  The  Lamentations  are,  indeed,  possessed  of 
considerable  merit  in  their  way,  but  still  betray  an  unpoetic  period  and  degenerated  taste  " 
[Introduction  to  Psalms,  p.  48).     On  the  other  hand,  Naegelsbach  accords  the  highest  place  to 

*  This  opinion  of  Jerome  might  have  been  caused  by  the  use  of  Aramaic  forms  and  other  peculiarities  of  later  Hebrew. 
EiCHHOBN,  Einltitung,  III.,  p.  122.  Gesenitjs,  Geshicte  der  Beb.  Sprache,  p.  35.  Referred  to  in  Kitto's  Oyc.  Sac.  Lit,  art. 
Jeremiah. 


22  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATION'S  OF  JEREMIAH. 


the  Book  as  a  work  of  art,  and  regards  its  production  as  far  above  and  beyond  the  ability  of  the 

uncultured  and  almost  rustic  Jeremiah.  He  is  certainly  right  in  his  appreciation  of  the  style  of 
the  Lamentations,  and  many  of  the  best  judges  of  style  agree  with  him.  "  Never  was  there  a 
more  rich  and  elegant  variety  of  beautiful  images  and  adjuncts,  arranged  together  within  so  small 
a  compass,  nor  more  happily  chosen  and  applied  "  (Lowth,  De  Sac.  Foes.  Heb.  Praelect.  XXII. 
KiTTO,  Oyc.  Bib.  Lit.).  "Never  did  city  suffer  a  more  miserable  fate,  never  was  ruined  city 
lamented  in  language  so  exquisitely  pathetic.  Jerusalem  is,  as  it  were  personified,  and  bewailed 
with  the  passionate  sorrow  of  private  and  domestic  attachment:  while  the  more  general 
pictures  of  the  famine,  the  common  misery  of  every  rank,  and  age,  and  sex,  all  the  desolation, 
the  carnage,  the  violation,  the  dragging  away  into  captivity,  the  remembrance  of  former  glories, 
of  the  gorgeous  ceremonies,  and  the  glad  festivals,  the  awful  sense  of  the  Divine  wrath  heighten- 
ing the  present  calamities,  are  successively  drawn  with  all  the  life  and  reality  of  an  eye-witness. 
They  combine  the  truth  of  history  with  the  deepest  pathos  of  poetry"  (Milman,  Hist,  of  Jews, 
vol.  I.  B.  viii.  p.  260).  Before  we  leave  this  matter  of  the  general  characteristics  of  the  style 
of  Jeremiah's  prophecies  and  of  the  style  of  the  Lamentations,  we  would  repeat  an  assertion  al- 
ready made,  that  there  must  be,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  great  diversity  between  "  the  oratorical 
prose"  (as  Bishop  Wordsworth  calls  it)  of  the  one*  and  the  rhythmical  lyrical  poetry  of  the  other. 
The  acrostic  structure  of  the  Lamentations  is  regarded  as  a  peculiarity  of  style  that  Jere- 
miah would  not  have  adopted.  "  De  Wette  maintains  [Comment,  i'lber  die  Fsahn,  p.  56)  that 
this  acrostic  form  of  writing  was  the  outgrowth  of  a  feeble  and  degenerate  age,  dwelling  on  the 
outer  structure  of  poetry  when  the  soul  had  departed.  His  judgment  as  to  the  origin  and 
character  of  the  alphabetic  form  is  shared  by  Ewald  {Poet.  Buck.,  I,  p.  140).  It  is  hard,  how- 
ever, to  reconcile  this  estimate  with  the  impression  made  on  us  by  such  Psalms  as  the  25th  and 
34th ;  and  Ewald  himself,  in  his  translation  of  the  Alphabetic  Psalms  and  the  Lamentations, 
has  shown  how,  compatible  such  a  structure  is  with  the  highest  energy  and  beauty  "  (Smith's 
Bib.  Diet.,  art.  Lament.,  n.  g.).  The  modern  acrostic— the  spelling  out  of  words  or  sentences 
in  the  initial  letters  of  rhymed  verses — is  justly  regarded  as  a  species  of  literary  trifling,  pleasing 
only  to  a  fanciful,  finical  or  puerile  taste.  If  the  alphabetical  acrostic  of  the  Hebrews  is  also  to 
be  regarded  as  belonging  merely  to  the  curiosities  of  literature,  the  chief  or  whole  merit  of  the 
production  consisting  in  the  acrostic  itself,  or  derived  from  the  difficulties  to  be  overcome,  an  ex- 
hibition of  literary  acrobatism— poetry  on  an  alphabetical  tight-rope, — then  we  may  condemn 
it  as  an  evidence  of  vitiated  taste,  and  should  regard  it  as  beneath  the  dignity  of  any  inspired 
writer,  and  especially  of  such  a  glorious  and  venerable  prophet  as  Jeremiah  was.  But  we 
find  on  examination,  that  these  alphabetical  Hebrew  poems  have  great  merit,  aside  from 
their  acrostic  form,  which  they  retain  when  stripped  of  that  form,  as  they  are  in  our  modern 
translations.  This  and  the  fact  that  this  form  was  ever  adopted  by  inspired  writers, 
lead  us  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Hebrew  alphabetical  acrostic  must  have  served  a  far  higher 
purpose  than  our  modern  acrostics  do.  It  is  not  impossible  that  it  may  have  belonged  to 
the  highest  art  of  ancient  Hebrew  poetry,  though  we,  now,  may  not  be  able  to  appreciate 
all  the   excellencies    an  ancient   Hebrew  might  have   discerned   in  this  species   of  writing.f 


*  "There  remains  a  single  class  of  poets  among  the  Jews— a  class  peculiar  to  that  people— the  prophets.  The  most  of 
them  delivered  their  predictions  in  poetry.  It  is  mi  generis.  It  is  not  precisely  poetry,  nor  is  it  oratory.  It  is  sublime 
vision.  The  event  seen  passing  before  the  mental  eye  of  the  prophet  is  revealed  in  lofty  rhythm,  in  glowing  imagery.  It  is 
eloquent  in  the  highest  sense,  and  stands  near  the  line  where  oratory  and  poetry  meet.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  most 
impassioned  strains  of  the  greatest  orators  become  rhythmical,  and  have  a  solemn  march  whicli  resembles  vision.  We  sei> 
it  in  all  their  greatest  efforts  "  (Pres.  Quart.  Rev.,  Jan.  1861,  Art.lY.,  Hehreiv  Lang,  and  Poetyy,p.  40.3). 

t  Gkrlacu  :  •'  That  the  alphabetical  arrangement  may  be  regarded  iis  inappropriate  to  Jeremiah,  when  his  .soul  was  filled 
with  sorrow,  can  onlv  be  maintained  by  regarding  tlie  metrical  style  of  poetry  as  generally  inconsistent  with  deep  grief, 
which  no  one  presumes  to  do.  Here  the  argument  finally  depends  on  the  question  as  to  the  signiftcation  of  this  alphabetical 
arrangement.  De  Wette  {Cbmm.  Psalms,  p.  58),  declares  it  'a  rhythmical  artifice, a  product  of  the  later  and  degenerated 
taste'  (E.  Reuss  in  Herzog'.s  Encyc.  V.,  p.  90G.  Speierhi),  and  Ewai.d  (Poet,  lluch.  I.,  S.  139.  3  Aufl.  I.,  S.  201)  esteems  it  a 
sign  of  '  declining  art;  against  what  Sommer  (bihl.  Ahhandl,  S.  94)  says  for  the  higher  age  of  this  form  of  poetry  (as  HiTZiG 
also,  at  least  he  does  not  deny  the  Davi.lical  authorship  of  Ps.  ix.  and  x.  on  account  of  the  alphabetical  structure).  But  if 
it  were  j.roved  that  such  an  artificial  construction  were,  on  general  grounds,  unworthy  of  the  prophet,  then  '  with  equal 
propriety  we  would  condemn  the  Songs,  BrfiM  du  deine  Wege,  by  I'.  Gkrhahiit,  and  Wie  schim  V'uc?d  uns  der  Morge.nstem, 
by  Nicniu,  since  there  is  an  artificialness  in  the  beginning  of  the  verses,  sucli  as  we  could  not  expect  in  poets  so  pre- 
eminent and  vigorous  '  (UENGSTENBERa,  Ps.  2,  S.  93);  and  even  Thenius  allows  (S.  190)  that  this  were  hypercritical.    So 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  23 


Without  doubt  it  had  mnemonic  advantages  and  also  served  the  purpose  of  an  artificial  vin- 
culura  for  thoughts  and  sentences  having  no  close  logical  connection.  But  we  cannot  accept  the 
opinion  that  these  were  its  only  or  even  its  chief  recommendations.*  Jeremiah  might  have  been 
influenced  by  the  first  reason  in  adopting  this  style  in  the  Lamentations:  but  the  other  could 
hardly  have  influenced  him,  for  the  Lamentations  are  not  composed  of  thoughts  and  sentences 
loosely  connected,  as  has  been  too  often  asserted,  needing  to  be  strung  together  by  this  alphabeti- 
cal artifice ;  on  the  contrary  there  is  a  very  close  logical  connection  and  a  consecutive  flow  of 
thought  in  these  poems,  and  that  this  is  not  always  apparent  is  owing  to  this  very  alphabetical 
structure,  which  sometimes  breaks  up  and  interrupts  the  sense,  and  is  in  this  respect  an  actual 
hinderance  to  the  natural  and  proper  connection  of  sentiment  and  expression.  It  is,  therefore,  im- 
possible that  Jeremiah  chose  it  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  by  artificial  means  the  lack  of  logical 
connection  in  the  subject  matter  of  his  poem.  He  must  have  been  influenced  by  other  considera- 
tions. What  were  they?  We  can,  we  think,  specify  three  reasons,  any  one  of  which  would 
justify  his  adoption  of  this  style,  and  all  of  which  probably  combined  in  determining  the  external 
structure  of  this  exquisite  poem.  1.  The  assistance  afi'orded  by  this  alphabetical  structure  in 
maintaining  the  rhythmical  parallelism  of  the  poem.  The  parallelism  of  the  Lamentations,  as 
may  be  seen  at  a  glance,  is  not  the  usual  parallelism  of  thought  and  sentiment,  so  characteristic 
of  Hebrew  poetry :  but  it  is  strictly  the  parallelism  of  rhythm  (see  Noyes,  Introduction  to 
Psalms,  pp.  43-46).  "The  simply  rhythmical  parallelism  holds  the  most  prominent  place  in  the 
Lamentations  of  Jeremiah.  Here  the  parallelism  of  thoughts  is  to  be  reckoned  almost  among 
the  exceptions,  and  when  it  does  occur,  it  is,  for  the  most  part,  the  subordinate  parallelism  of  a 
member  by  itself;  in  general,  the  rhythm  alone  predominates,  and  that  too  with  a  regularity 
which  is  rare  among  Hebrew  poets,  producing  here  a  suitable  effect,  namely,  monotony  of  com- 
plaint" (NoYES,  ib.,  p.  45).  This  rhythm  consists  in  dividing  each  verse  into  three  members  in 
chap,  i.,  ii.,  iii.,  into  two  members  in  chap,  iv.,  and  in  making  each  verse  of  chapter  v.  consist  of 
one  member,  and  in  balancing  each  member  with  a  caesura,  "  which  coincides  with  the  sense  and 
the  accent,"  though  "we  are  sometimes  under  the  necessity  of  abandoning  the  accents,  because 
they  follow  the  sense,  while  the  rhythm  is  independent  of  the  sense  "  (Noyes).  This  peculiar 
construction  gives  to  the  Hebrew  original  "  that  conciseness  and  brevity  "  which,  as  Henderson 
remarks  {Introduction,  p.  277),  it  is  impossible  to  exhibit  in  a  translation.  But  rhythmical 
parallelism,  as  Noyes  observes,  "  is  too  loose  a  form  to  retain  an  exuberant  matter  without 
passing  over  into  the  prosaic  style."  This  is  to  be  guarded  against.  In  the  absence  of  the 
parallelism  of  thoughts  and  sentiments,  how  shall  the  writer  distinguish  his  poetry  from  mere 
prose  composition,  in  which  rhythm  often  occurs  without  constituting  poetry?  To  meet  this 
difficulty,  the  advantage  of  the  artificial  restraint  of  the  alphabetical  structure  is  obvious.  At 
equal  periods,  both  writer  and  reader  are  reminded,  in  the  absence  of  parallel  thoughts,  that  the 
rhythmical  parallelism  is  ended,  and  is  to  begin  anew.  Thus  the  writer  is  checked  and  curbed 
and  saved  from  the  fault  of  an  inelegant  redundancy  of  expression,  while  the  reader  is  instructed 
to  observe  the  proper  inflections  and  to  expect  some  new  change  of  thought  or  expression.  If 
the  original  was  written  without  points,  as  doubtless  it  was,  we  can  readily  apprehend  how  al- 
most necessary  some  such  artificial  help  to  correct  writing  and  reading,  as  this  alphabetical  struc- 

much  the  stranger  is  the  contradiction  into  which  he  falls  when  he  asserts  (5. 124),  that  the  expansion  of  the  alphabetical 
•tructure  in  ch.  iii.,  is  'an  artificiality,  to  which  only  a  less  spiritual  poet  could  confine  himself,  and  which  alone  by  itselt 
repels  the  thought  that  Jeremiah  could  have  composed  this  poem.'  Very  far  from  necessarily  indicating  a  peculiarly  arti- 
ficial style,  '  the  alphabetical  structure  rather  belongs  to  the  means  of  giving  to  poetical  writing  the  cliaracter  of  connected 
ness  which  is  necessary  to  it '  (Hengstenberg,  ib.  loc),  and  has  for  its  object  '  to  give  to  such  songs,  as  do  not  allow  of  being 
rounded-off  and  finished  by  the  internal  development  of  the  thoughts,  the  character  of  a  complete  composition  by  means  of 
passing  through  the  whole  alphabet — the  symbol  of  completeness '  (Keil  in  Haevernick,  EUnl.,  III.  8,  48,  vgl.,  514)." 

*  LoWTH  :  "  The  acrostic  or  alphabetical  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  was  certainly  intended  to  assist  the  memory,  and  was  con- 
finet?  altogether  to  those  compositions  which  consisted  of  detached  maxims  or  sentiments  without  any  express  order  or  con- 
nection "  (Gregory's  Trans.  II.,  Led.  22,  p.  134).  Gerlach  with  dogmatic  positiveness  denies  that  the  object  of  this  form  was 
"of  the  external  sort,  to  assist  the  recollection  of  the  learners,  as  IIuet,  Lowth,  and  lately  Thenius  assume."  It  could  not 
tail,  however,  to  facilitate  the  memorizing  of  the  poems  thus  written  ;  and  in  an  age  when  the  recitation  of  poems  from 
memorj-  was  the  prevailing  fashion,  and  in  lyrical  poems  the  recitations  were  sung,  rather  than  pronounced,  to  the  aoconi- 
paninient  of  music,  the  alphabetical  structure  possessed  advantages  that  the  greatest  poets  would  not  despise.  Gerlach  is 
also  at  fault,  when,  like  Lowth,  he  would  confine  the  use  of  the  alphabetical  itructure  to  the  connection  of  detached  sea- 
toDces  or  thoughts  only  loosely  related  to  each  other. 


24  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

ture  afforded,  may  have  been.  It  is  not  impossible  that  the  poem,  as  originally  written,  could 
not  have  been  intelligibly  read,  without  great  difl&culty,  but  for  this  artificial  and  alphabetical 
arrangement.  2.  This  artificial  structure  gives  to  the  Poem  an  expression  of  unity  and  complete- 
ness. The  five  songs,  each  of  twenty -two  verses,  four  of  them  alphabetically  arranged,  the  middle 
one  repeating  the  alphabet  three  times,  the  last  one,  not  alphabetical,  but  short,  rapid  and  metrical, 
compose  a  symmetrical  whole,  that  would  be  vitiated  by  any  structural  change  whatever.  Even 
through  the  eye,  this  external  form,  when  clearly  written,  must  have  conveyed  to  the  mind  a  con- 
viction that  the  five  Songs  composed  one  poem.  The  visual  effect  was  an  aid  to  the  intellectui^l  ap- 
prehension of  the  design  and  spiritual  purport  of  the  poem.  It  is  one,  and  only  one.*  The  architec- 
tural idea  suggested  by  Naegelsbach  is  thus  perfected,  a  temple  rising  to  the  crowning  dome 
supported  by  the  well  proportioned  columns  that  rest  on  a  common  foundation.  Or  we  may  ima- 
gine our  poem  a  Jacob's  ladder,  each  golden  round  of  which  is  denoted  by  a  letter;  as  this  ladder 
rises  from  earth  to  heaven,  the  separate  steps,  at  first  wide  apart,  grow  closer  together,  and  then 
their  distinctive  marks  are  lost  to  sight  and  we  can  only  see  that  the  top  of  the  ladder  is  over- 
shadowed with  the  glory  of  God  amidst  the  clouds  of  incense  of  prayer  and  adoration.  These  illus- 
trations, if  deemed  over  fanciful,  may  yet  serve  to  show  how  the  alphabetical  structure  of  the  poem 
assists  our  conception  of  it  as  a  whole,  binds  together  its  separate  parts  and  gives  it  the  expres- 
sion of  unity  and  completeness.  3.  The  alphabetical  structure  was  a  mechanical  assistance  to 
the  writer,  helping  him  to  curb  and  control  his  own  emotions  and  check  the  ebullitions  of  violent 
and  turbulent  grief.  This  is  the  view  taken  by  the  author  of  the  article  on  Lamentations  in  Dr. 
Wm.  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible.  He  says,  "the  choice  of  a  structure  so  artificial  as  that 
which  has  been  described  above,  may  at  first  sight  appear  inconsistent  with  the  deep  intense  sor- 
row of  which  it  claims  to  be  the  utterance.  Some  wilder,  less-measured  rhythm  would  seem  to  us 
to  have  been  a  fitter  form  of  expression.  It  would  belong,  however,  to  a  very  shallow  and  hasty 
criticism  to  pass  this  judgment.  A  man  true  to  the  gift  he  has  received  will  welcome  the  dis- 
cipline of  self-imposed  rules  for  deep  sorrow  as  well  as  for  other  strong  emotions.  In  proportion 
as  he  is  afraid  of  being  carried  away  by  the  strong  current  of  feeling,  will  he  be  anxious  to  make 
the  laws  more  difficult,  the  discipline  more  effectual.  Something  of  this  kind  is  traceable  in  the 
fact  that  so  many  of  the  master-minds  of  European  literature  have  chosen,  as  the  fit  vehicle  for 
their  deepest,  tenderest,  most  impassioned  thoughts,  the  complicated  structure  of  the  sonnet ; 
also  in  Dakte's  selection  of  the  terza  rima  for  his  vision  of  the  unseen  world.  What  the  sonnet 
was  to  Petrarch  and  to  Milton,  that  the  alphabetic  verse  system  was  to  the  writers  of  Jeremiah's 
time,  the  most  difficult  among  the  recognized  forms  of  poetry,  and  yet  one  in  which  (as- 
suming the  earlier  date  of  some  of  the  [alphabetical]  Psalms  .  .  .  )  some  of  the  noblest  thoughts 
of  that  poetry  had  been  uttered.  We  need  not  wonder  that  he  should  have  employed  it  as 
fitter  than  any  other  for  the  purpose  for  which  he  used  it."  Bishop  Wordsworth  gives  the 
same  reason  why  Jeremiah  adopted  this  form.  "Like  persons  of  strong  emotions,  he  trembles 
at  the  power  of  his  own  passions,  and  resorts  to  mechanical  helps,  which  may  employ  his  atten- 
tion, and  may  save  him  from  being  overcome  by  his  feelings,  and  swept  away  by  the  strong  tide 
and  current  of  the  violent  impetuosity  of  his  passions.  As  an  Alpine  traveller,  skirting  the 
sharp  edge  of  a  precipice,  is  not  unthankful  for  the  wooden  hand-rail  which  runs  along  it,  and  by 
which  he  supports  his  steps  if  his  eyes  become  dizzy  at  the  sight  of  the  dark  deep  gulf  and  the 
foaminw  cataract  below  him,  so  Jeremiah  does  not  disdain  to  lean  on  artificial  supports  in  the  most 
vf-hement  outbursts  of  his  emotions.  His  Lamentations  amid  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem  are  the 
most  impassioned  utterances  of  Hebrew  poetry ;  and  the  alphabetical  arrangement  of  the  stanzas, 
which  at  first  sight  may  seem  to  be  a  rigid  mechanical  device,  was  doubtless  designed,  not  only 
as  a  help  to  the  memory  of  his  Hebrew  fellow-countrymen,  who  would  recite  them  in  their  cap- 
tivity and  dispersion,  but  also  to  be  a  stay  and  support  to  himself  in  his  own  vehement  agitations" 
(Introduction  to  Jeremiah,  p.  xv.). 

The  vigor  and  vivacity  of  style  have  been  urged  as  a  reason  why  Jeremiah  could  not,  in 
his  old  age,  have  composed  the  Lamentations.     These  we  are  told  reveal  a  young  man.     The 

*  "  In  order  to  give  to  the  Lamentations,  ever  expressed  in  new  words,  images  and  turns  of  thought,  the  character  of  com- 
pleteniss ;nid  of  a  connected  production,  tliese  Songs  are,  with  the  exception  of  the  last  one,  constructed  alphabetically" 
IKeil,  KinUitung  des  All.  Test.,  1 126,  p.  377). 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  26 


expression  in  iii  27  is  appealed  to  as  a  plausible  evidence  that  the  writer  was  young.  This 
sage  observation,  however,  "  It  is  good  for  a  man  that  he  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth,"  is 
certainly  the  grave,  mature  reflection  of  an  old  man.  The  young  are  not  apt  to  appreciate 
the  benefits  of  affliction.  It  is  the  old  man  of  long  experience  and  long  observation,  wh:> 
looking  backward,  as  it  is  the  habit  of  old  men  to  do,  discerns  the  wholesome  discipline  there 
was  in  the  sorrows  and  trials  of  earlier  years.  In  this  very  verse,  therefore,  as  in  the  whole 
book,  we  recognize  the  tone  and  spirit  of  an  aged  man ; — of  a  man  who  has,  in  fact,  left  hope 
in  regard  to  the  things  of  this  world  behmd  him,  and  exchanged  it  for  a  sublime  faith  in  the 
fulfilment  of  Divine  purposes  and  promises  in  a  future  that  lies  beyond  the  terminus  of  his  own 
individual  life-time, — such  faith  as  bought  the  field  in  Anathoth,  when  the  prophet  was  fully 
persuaded  that  he  himself  would  derive  no  benefit  from  it. — But  it  is  not  certain  that  Jeremiah 
had  arrived  at  an  extreme  old  age  when  the  Book  of  Lamentations  was  written  In  the  thirteenth 
year  of  Josiah,  he  speaks  of  himself  as  "  a  child."  He  may  have  been  then  as  young  as  was 
Samuel,  when  he  was  called  to  the  prophetical  office,  in  which  case  Jeremiah  would  have  been  not 
more  than  fifty-three  years  of  age  when  Jerusalem  was  destroyed.  But  had  he  been  twenty  years 
old  in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah,  he  would  have  been  just  over  sixty  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  in  the  very  prime  of  intellectual  and  moral  vigor. — But  granting  the  possibility 
that  he  might  have  been  seventy  or  eighty  years  of  age,  or  even  older,  it  should  not  surprise  us. 
that  he,  the  prophet  of  God,  writing  by  inspiration  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  should  produce  a  book 
which  is  confessedly  written  with  a  mental  force  unabated  and  a  versatility  of  genius  unimpaired. 
Nor  would  it  be  "by  any  means  a  singular  instance  of  a  richer  and  mellower  imagination  at  the 
close  of  life,  than  during  its  morning  or  its  meridian.  This  for  example  was  remarkably  the  case 
with  the  magnificent  Burke."  The  writer  just  quoted,  speaking  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  and 
its  aged  author,  says  :  "Solomon,  at  the  close  of  his  life  here  hived  up  the  wisdom  of  past  years 
for  our  instruction.  *  *  The  setting  of  the  sun  of  the  great  Master  of  wisdom,  whom  God  Him- 
self made  chief  of  learned  men,  threatened  indeed  to  be  enveloped  with  dark  clouds,  but  its  rays 
broke  nobly  forth  before  it  passed  below  the  horizon,  and  upon  those  clouds  are  nainted  the  rich 
hues  of  mingled  imagination  and  philosophy''  {Pres.  Quart.  Review,  Jan.  1861,  Art.  IV.,  p.  462). 
Jeremiah,  too,  at  the  close  of  life,  compressed  the  spirit  and  the  teachings  of  all  his  prophecies  into 
one  wondrous  poem,  excelling  all  he  had  before  written  in  the  vigor  of  its  conception,  and  force, 
beauty  and  pathos  of  its  expression.  His  life  and  his  ministry  had  been  like  a  stormy  day.  But 
that  day  was  not  abruptly  ended,  as  was  threatened,  in  the  dark  night  of  Jerusalem's  destruction. 
For  him  there  remained  a  protracted  evening  twilight,  comparatively  calm  and  tranquil,  though 
sorrowful  always  and  perturbed  with  some  fitful  returns  of  stormy  experiences,  as  the  animosities 
of  Egyptians  and  Israelites  against  him,  provoked  by  his  prophecies  in  Tahpanhes,  indicate  (see 
Jer.  xliii.,  xliv.) :  and  in  these  chastened  hours,  before  his  life  finally  dissolved  in  tears,  his  genius 
gathered  into  one  harmonious  composition,  the  spirit  and  truth  of  his  eloquent  prophecies,  to  re- 
main for  ever  the  crown  and  glory  of  his  ministry  in  the  church  of  God. 

We  have  shown  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  style  of  the  Lamentations  incompatible  with  thp 
belief  that  Jeremiah  was  their  author.  We  are  now  to  exhibit  the  evidences  of  certain  simi- 
larities of  style  between  Jeremiah's  Prophecies  and  the  Lamentations,  which  confirm  our  belief 
that  both  Books  were  the  production  of  one  author.  1.  The  individual  temperament  of  Jere- 
miah, as  evinced  in  his  acknowledged  writings,  was  precisely  that  of  the  elegiac  poet  of  the 
Lamentations;  occupied  with  the  present  and  actual,  rather  than  given  to  discursive  flights 
into  the  regions  of  the  distant  and  possible ;  sensitive,  quick  in  susceptibility  ;  ready  to  ex- 
press his  emotions  and  never  concealing  them,  revealing  "  unreservedly  the  secret  recesses  and 
inmost  working  of  his  own  heart "  (  Wordswoeth)  ;  passionate  in  his  grief,  and  prone  to  linger 
among  the  causes  of  his  sorrow  and  brood  over  them  and  harp  upon  them ;  and  tender-hearted 
towards  others  and  sympathetic,  throwing  himself  "  unhesitatingly  into  the  condition  of  those  to 
whom  he  speaks"  (Wordsworth).  2.  The  religious  characteristics  of  Jeremiah  reappear  in 
the  Lamentations.  The  same  disposition  to  hold  both  God  and  the  people  firm  to  covenant  en- 
gagements :  the  habit  of  tracing  suff'ering  to  sin :  the  quick  discernment  of  punishment,  past 
or  coming,  on  Jew  and  Gentile.  What  has  been  said  of  Jeremiah  with  reference  to  his  pro- 
phecies, may  be  affirmed  of  the  author  of  the  Lamentations :  "  the  Religion,  the  Monarchy 


26  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATlOxNS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


and  the  other  Institutions  of  his  country,  seem  to  be  absorbed  and  concentrated  in  him  ;  and 
his  own  individuality  is  lost  in  sympathy  with  them.  His  prophetic  sternness  is  a  consequence 
of  the  intensity  of  his  zeal  for  the  glory  of  the  God  of  Israel,  and  of  his  love  for  the  People 
of  the  Lord"  (Wordsworth,  Intr.  Jer.,  p.  xv.).  3.  The  following  general  "  marks  of  style" 
have  been  indicated  (see  Smith's  Bib.  Diet.,  art.  Jeremiah)  as  characteristic  of  his  prophetic 
writings,  all  of  which  are  manifest,  some  of  them  very  distinctly,  in  his  Lamentations.  Re- 
miniscences and  reproductions  of  what  earlier  prophets  had  written.  Influences  on  his  mind 
of  the  newly  discovered  law,  and  especially  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy.  A  tendency  to  re- 
produce himself — to  repeat  in  nearly  the  same  words  the  great  truths  which  affected  his  own 
heart,  and  which  he  wished  to  impress  on  the  hearts  of  others.  Analogies  drawn  "  not  from 
the  region  of  the  great  and  terrible,  but  from  the  most  homely  and  familiar  incidents  (xiii.  1- 
11 ;  xviii.  1-10)."  4.  It  is  a  striking  peculiarity  of  Jeremiah,  which  we  find  repeated  in 
the  Lamentations,  that  the  future  deliverance  of  Israel  is  set  forth  under  the  form  of  the 
destruction  of  their  enemies.  Thus  elegies,  i.,  iii.  and  iv.,  end  with  predictions  of  the  pun- 
ishment of  hostile  nations,  where  we  would  expect  an  announcement  of  deliverance  and  salva- 
tion for  Israel.  Turn  now  to  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  read  his  predictions  against  Egypt 
(xlvi.),  Phihstia  (xlvii.),  Moab  (xlviii.),  Ammon,  Edom,  Syria,  Kedar,  Hazor,  Ehm  (xlix.),and 
Babylon  (L,  li.).  Do  we  not  recognize  the  same  prophetical  spirit,  and  the  same  peculiar, 
characterististic  recognition  of  the  heathen  nations  in  their  ''  typical  character,  as  representa- 
tives of  various  kinds  of  enmity  against  the  church  of  Christ  "  (Wordsworth,  Intr.  Jer.,  p, 
xiii.),  so  that  their  humiliation  or  destruction  is  tantamount  to  the  glory  and  deliverance  of 
the  people  of  God?  5.  Incidental  evidences  of  the  identity  of  the  author  of  Jeremiah's  pro- 
phecies and  of  the  Lamentations,  in  many  minute  points  of  resemblance. — "  As  in  the  Prophecies 
of  Jeremiah,  so  here,  the  causes  of  the  exile  of  the  people,  and  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  Temple,  are  represented  to  be  the  vices  and  crimes  of  the  covenant  people  (compare  i. 
5,  8, 14,  22 ;  iii.  39,  42 ;  iv.  6,  22 ;  v.  16,  with  Jer.  xiii.  22,  26  ;  xiv.  7  :  xvi.  10-12 ;  xvii.  1-3), 
their  guilty  reliance  on  false  prophets  and  profligate  priests  (comp.  ii.  14 ;  iv.  13-15,  with  Jer. 
ii.  7,  8 ;  v.  31 ;  xiv.  13  ;  xxiii.  11-40  ;  xxvii.  etc.),  their  false  confidence  of  security  in  Jerusalem 
(comp.  iv.  12,  with  Jer.  vii,  4-15),  their  vain  hope  of  the  assistance  of  weak  and  perfidious  allies 
(comp.  i.  2,  19;  iv.  17,  with  Jer.  ii.  18,  36;  xxx,  14;  xxxvii.  5-10),  Haev.  Einl,  S.  515" 
(Keil,  Einleitung  in  A.  T.,  §  127,  p.  379). — "  In  both  "  (the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  the 
Lamentations)  "  we  meet  once  and  again,  with  the  picture  of  the  '  virgin  daughter  of  Zion,' 
sitting  down  in  her  shame  and  misery  (Lam.  i.  15;  ii.  13;  Jer.  xiv.  17).  In  both  there  is  the 
same  vehement  outpouring  of  sorrow.  The  prophet's  eyes  flow  down  with  tears  (Lam.  i.  16; 
ii.  11  ;  iii.  48,  49  ;  Jer.  ix.  1 ;  xiii.  17  ;  xiv.  17).  There  is  the  same  haunting  feeling  of  being 
surrounded  with  fears  and  terrors  on  every  side  (Lam.  ii.  22 ;  Jer.  vi.  25  ;  xlvi.  5).  In  both 
the  worst  of  all  the  evils  is  the  iniquity  of  the  prophets  and  priests  (Lam.  ii.  14;  iv.  13  ;  Jer.  v. 
30,  31 ;  xiv.  13,  14).  The  sufferer  appeals  for  vengeance  to  the  righteous  Judge  (Lam.  iii.  64- 
66  ;  Jer.  xi.  20).  He  bids  the  rival  nations  that  exulted  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  prepare  for  a 
like  desolation  (Lam.  iv.  21;  Jer.  xlix.  12)  "  (Smith's  Bib.  Diet.,  art.  Lamentations). — Besides 
undeniable  repetitions,  there  are  many  similarities  of  thought  and  structure.  There  are  passages 
in  the  Lamentations  that  seem  Jeremiah-like,  echoes  and  suggestions  of  his  prophecies,  though 
we  cannot  always  connect  them  with  any  particular  utterance  of  that  Prophet.  Sometimes, 
again,  the  one  distinctly  and  promptly  suggests  and  recalls  the  others.  For  example.  In  Lam. 
i.  20,  "  Behold,  0  Lord,  for  I  am  in  distress  ;  my  bowels  are  troubled  ;  mine  heart  is  turned 
within  me,"  and  in  Lam.  ii.  11,  "  my  bowels  are  troubled  within  me,  my  liver  is  poured  upon 
the  earth,"  we  recognize  the  man  of  whom  it  has  been  said — with  reference  to  Jer.  iv.  19,  "  My 
bowels,  ray  bowels !  I  am  pained  at  my  very  heart ;  ray  heart  raaketh  a  noise  in  me  " — 
"  through  the  chambers  of  his  innermost  heart  there  is  a  shudder  "  (Ewald,  quoted  by  Stanley). 
Lam.  ii.  14,  aside  from  its  verbal  similarities,  could  only  have  been  written  by  the  author  of 
Jer.  xxiii.  36-38.  The  same  clarion  voice  that  rung  out  the  cry  as  if  from  the  ramparts  of  Baby- 
lon in  Jer.  li.  12,  is  heard  resounding  from  the  broken  walls  of  Jerusalem  in  Lam.  ii.  17.  He 
who  arrested  himself  on  the  very  verge  of  a  criminal  despair,  when  he  wrote  Lam.  iii.  18  (see  the 
Commentary),  surely  had  in  his  mind  the  words  he  had  before  written  in  Jer.  iv.  10  and  xx.  7 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  27 

And  the  author  of  Lam.  iii.  10, — "  He  was  unto  me  as  a  bear  lying  in  wait,  and  as  a  lion  in 
secret  places," — was  only  in  imagination  transferring  to  himself  that  perilous  position,  in  which 
he  had  with  grief  and  horror  contemplated  "  the  struggles  of  the  expiring  kingdom  of  Judah, 
like  those  of  a  hunted  animal, — now  flying,  now  standing  at  bay,  between  two  huge  beasts  of 
prey,  which,  whilst  their  main  object  is  to  devour  each  other,  turn  aside  from  time  to  time  to 
snatch  at  the  smaller  victim  that  has  crossed  their  midway  path." 

5.  Last  of  all,  and  most  conclusive  as  a  rebutting  argument  to  Dr.  Naegelsbach's  assertion, 
we  have  the  striking  verbal  analogies  between  these  two  books.  But  now  we  come  into  direct 
collision  with  Dr.  Naegelsbach's  assertion,  that  the  language  is  not  the  language  of  Jeremiah. 

It  would  be  a  stronger  argument  to  say  that  Jeremiah  did  not  write  Lamentations,  because 
it  mtroduces  a  great  many  thoughts  and  ideas  not  contained  in  his  prophecies,  than  it  is  to  urge 
the  appearance  of  new  words,  or  of  old  words  in  new  combinations,  not  found  in  his  prophecies. 
For  it  is  notorious  that  men  of  letters  have  greater  command  of  language  than  of  thoughts, 
greater  versatility  in  expressing  the  same  thought  in  different  words,  than  of  infusing  original 
ideas  into  old  words.     But  Dr.  Naegelsbach  has  succeeded  in  making  his  argument  very  im- 
posing and  formidable  in  appearance  at  least,  by  spreading  out  upon  his  pages  a  long  list  of 
assumed  variations  in  language  between  Jeremiah's  prophecies  and  the  Lamentations.     Only 
ten  verses  in  the  whole  book  have  escaped  his  acute  criticism,  the  results  of  which  are  all  dis- 
played to  full  advantage.     While  the  patient  labor  evinced  by  this  minute  catalogue  is  to  be 
commended,  the  reader  will  feel  that  Dr,  Naegelsbach  might  have  spared  him  the  almost  equal 
labor  of  entering  into  all  the  details  of  the  work  of  investigation,  by  classifying  its  results  under 
a  few  general  heads.     Had  he  done  so,  his  pages  would  have  presented  to  the  eye  at  least,  a  less 
startling  array  of  facta  and  instances, — but  he  himself  might  have  discovered,  in  the  process 
of  generalization,  that  those  facts  and  instances  are  more  apparent  to  the  eye  than  they  are 
to  the  understanding.     In  reviewing  this  catalogue  we  ought,  first  of  all,  to  remember  that  great 
differences  in  style  and  language,  between  two  such  books  as  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  the 
Lamentations,  even  if  the  productions  of  one  author,  were  to  be  expected ;  and  then,  secondly, 
we  should  inquire,  whether  the  differences  that  do  exist  are  such  as  are  compatible,  according 
to   the   rules   of   a   just   criticism,  with  their  being  the  productions  of  one  author.      With 
regard  to  the  first  point,  we  should  observe,  that  the  prophecies,  for  the  most  part,  have  some- 
what of  the   character  of  unpremeditated,  extemporaneous  effusions,  designed  to  produce  an 
immediate   effect   on   the   hearts  and  consciences  of  the   king,  the  princes,  priests,  prophets 
and  people.     Therefore  they  were  expressed  in  the  common  colloquial  words,  idioms  and  phrases 
of  daily  life.     These  prophetical  deliverances  often  assumed  the  forms  and  diction  of  poetry. 
But  it  was  the  poetry  of  the  orator,  rather  than  of  the  writer.     Eloquence  always  is  poetical. 
This  is  especially  true  of  oriental  eloquence.     But  its  poetry  is  the  expression  of  impassioned 
thoughts  in  language  imaginative  and  ornate,  spontaneously  and  unconsciously  falling  into  har- 
monious cadences,  that  with  us  who  speak  the  English  language  grow  into  rhythmical  periods, 
but  with  the  Hebrews  passed  into  parallelisms  and  regularly  constructed  sentences,  divided  by 
cesuras  and  accents  into  parts  corresponding  more  or  less  accurately  in  length.     Such  is  the 
poetry  we  find  in  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah ;  touching  our  hearts  by  their  pathos,  as  in  the 
weeping  Rachel,  refusing  to  be  comforted,  or  in  the  plaintive  cry.  Is  there  no  balra  in  Gilead,  no 
physician  there  ?  or  in  the  outburst  of  his  own  grief,  when  he  exclaims,  "  Oh,  that  my  head 
were  waters,  and  mine  eyes  a  fountain  of  tears,  that  I  might  weep  day  and  night  for  the  slain 
of  the  daughter  of  my  people;"  again  delighting  us  with  beautiful  imagery,  as  by  the  heath  in 
the  desert,  the  wayfaring  man,  the  athlete  wearied  by  the  footmen  before  he  contends  with  the 
horses;  or  overwhelming  us  with  the  grandeur  and  sublimity  of  his  conceptions,  as  in  chapter 
fourth,  where   he  depicts  "  the   tokens   attesting   the  forthcoming  of  the  Lord  to  vengeance. 
Chaos  comes  again  over  the  earth.     Darkness  covers  the  heavens.     The  everlasting  mountains 
tremble.     Man  disappears  from  below  and  the  birds  fly  from  the  darkened  air.     Cities  become 
ruins,  and  the  fruitful  places  wildernesses,  before  the  advancing  anger  of  the  Lord.    Byron's  Dark- 
ness  is  a  faint  copy  of  this  picture, — it  is  an  inventory  of  horrible  circumstances,  which  seem  to 
have   been   laboriously  culled   and   painfully  massed   up.     Jeremiah   performs   his   task  with 
two  or  three  strokes;  but  they  are  strokes  of  lightning"  (Gilfillan  :  Bards  of  the  Bible). 


28  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

Jeremiah's  Prophecies  contain  much  real  poetry,  not  only  such  in  virtue  of  intensity  of  feeling  and 
vividness  of  illustrative  description,  but  in  virtue  of  the  parallelisms  and  alternating  sentences, 
which  mark  Hebrew  poetry  as  distinctly  as  rhythm  and  rhyme  do  English  poetry.    Even  unpoetic 
translators  have  felt  compelled  to  give  it  the  external  garb  of  poetry,  by  marking  its  periods 
with  Imes,  though  some,  Uke  our  own  lamented  Dr.  J.  Addison  Alexander,  have  ineflfectually 
protested  against  ever  arraying  Hebrew  in  these  modern  vestments.     But,  after  all,  the  poetry 
of  Jeremiah's  Prophecies  is  the  production  of  a  Hebrew  orator,  rather  than  of  a  Hebrew  writer. 
The  fourth  chapter,  for  instance,  from  which  the  description  of  the  coming  judgment  is  taken, 
was  a  fervent  address  to  the  people,  designed  to  stir  them  up  to  repentance.     It  was  a  sermon, 
an  exhortation,  a  prophetic  message  from  God  to  His  Church.     Its  poetical  features  were  inci- 
dental to  its  impassioned  style.     The  same  remarks  will  apply  to  all  the  poetical  portions  of  the 
Book ;  and  much  of  the  Book  is  undeniably  simply  prose,  historical  or  ethical.     Throughout  he 
seeks,  not  poetical,  but  oratorical  effect.     He  speaks,  not  as  the  poet,  but  as  the  preacher.     Un- 
like the  Prophecies,  the  Lamentations  are  in  the  strictest  sense  a  poem.     This  poem  was  com- 
posed in  circumstances  very  diflFerent  from  those  in  which  the  Prophecies  were  produced,  and  for 
a  very  different  purpose.     The  prophet-preacher  and  orator  had  fulfilled  his  unsuccessful  mission 
and  retired  in  a  measure  from  public  view.     He  was  in  exile  with  that  portion  of  his  countrymen 
who  had  fled  to  Egypt.     Here  he,  who  had  passed  the  whole  of  the  former  part  of  his  life  amidst 
the  excitements  and  agitations  of  events  more  critical  and  important  than  any  that  had  occurred 
in  the  history  of  the  Jews  since  they  entered  on  possession  of  the  promised  land,  now  in  his  old 
age  experienced  comparative  quiet  and  leisure.     There  were,  it  is  true,  sorrow  and  suffering 
enouc'h  around  him.     The  fifth  chapter  of  the  Lamentations  affords  hints  of  these,  and  the  first 
chapter  tells  us  how  "the  pursuers  overtook  them  in  the  straits."     Yet  life  in  that  Egyptian 
exile  was  stagnation  compared  with  the  turbulent  history  of  the  prophet's  former  years.     The 
venerable  and  broken-hearted  man  had  time  now  for  careful  composition.     He  improved  the 
melancholy  hours  in  the  production  of  a  lyrical  poem,  in  which  his  object  was,  not  as  in  his 
prophecies,  to  produce  some  immediate  effect  upon  his  countrymen,  but  to  publish  to  the  world 
such  a  description  of  God's  judgments  on  Israel,  as  should  redound  to  the  glory  of  God  and  con- 
vey lessons  of  wisdom  and  piety  to  the  Church  in  all  time  to  come.     Everything  in  this  poem 
shows  premeditation  and  pains-taking  in  the  execution,  such  as  we  might  expect  of  the  prophet 
in  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was  placed.     He  imposed  upon  himself  the  most  artificial  rules 
then  practised  by  the  writers  of  poetry,  either  by  his  own  preference,  or  to  adapt  his  poem  to  the 
prevailing  tastes  of  the  Hebrew  people.     The  initial  letters  of  the  verses  were  to  be  alphabeti- 
cally arranged,  and  in  the  middle  chapter  or  song  the  alphabet  was  to  be  thrice  repeated  by 
giving  the  same  initial  letter  to  every  clause  of  each  verse  ;  each  verse  of  the  first  three  chapters 
was  to  consist  of  three  periods,  or  members,  the  fourth  chapter  of  two,  and  the  fifth  of  one,  agree- 
int'  externallv  with  what  Dr.  NAEaELSBACH  has  described,  in  musical  terms,  as  a  crescendo  and 
decrescendo  movement ;  and  each  period  or  member  of  a  verse  was  to  be  composed  of  two  parts, 
clearly  marked,  both  to  the  mind  and  ear,  by  a  pause.     These  were  the  rules  or  laws  of  compo- 
sition adopted.     Yet  these  artificial  restraints  were  to  be  so  managed  that  they  should  not  in- 
terrupt the  continuity  of  thought,  prevent  harmony  of  expression,  or  destroy  the  unity  that 
should  characterize  the  five  songs  as  the  component  parts  of  one  perfect  poem.     To  fulfil  all  these 
requirements,  a  careful  choice  of  words  and  phrases  was  imperative.     Deliberation  was  necessary 
at  every  step.     And  the  Poet  must  go  beyond  the  resources  of  his  accustomed  dialect  and  habit 
of  speaking  and  writing,  and  cull  from  the  whole  Hebrew  language  the  words,  idioms  and  ex- 
pressions that  best  suited  his  purpose.     The  result  inevitably  was  the  occurrence  in  this  poem 
of  a  phraseology  that  is  nowhere  else  found,  either  in  the  prophecies  of  the  same  author,  or  in 
any  other  single  Book  of  the  Holy  Bible.     How  could  it  be  otherwise  ?     We  think,  therefore, 
that  it  ought  to  be  assumed  and  granted,  as  a  foregone  conclusion,  that  the  Lamentations,  even 
if  written  by  Jeremiah,  should  contain  words,  phrases,  and  turns  of  thought  expressed  by  a  no- 
vel use  of  words,  nowhere  produced  in  his  book  of  prophecies.     Granting  this,  we  are  next  to 
ask,  whether  the  verbal  differences  between  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  the  Lamentations 
are  of  such  a  character  as  to  compel  us  to  the  decision  that  they  could  not  be  the  productions  of 
the  same  author  ?     For  a  full  answer  to  this  question,  we  must  refer  to  the  remarks  made  upon 


ADDITIONAL  RliMARKS  OX  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  29 


these  verbal  diflferences,  as  they  occur,  in  the  following  commentary.  But  a  sufficient  answer  is 
contained  in  the  statement,  that  all  these  differences  may  be  explained,  consistently  with  the 
presumption  that  Jeremiah  is  the  author  of  this  book,  by  a  due  consideration  of  the  following 
rules,  or  laws  of  construction.  In  the  application  of  these  rules,  frequent  reference  will  be  made 
to  the  poems  of  Shakspeare  compared  with  his  plays.  The  choice  of  these  poems  for  this 
purpose  is  induced  by  the  fact  that  Airs.  Clark's  Concordance  to  Shakspeare's  Flays  enables 
us  to  detect  what  is  new  and  peculiar  in  his  poems  as  compared  with  his  plays.  Time  has  not 
allowed  a  full  examination  of  these  poems.  Oaly  some  thirty  verses  of  the  two  larger  poems, 
"Venus  and  Adonis,"  and  "Tarquin  and  Lucrece,"  have  been  subjected  to  a  rapid  investigation. 
We  should  not  expect  as  many  verbal  discrepancies  between  the  plays  and  poems  of  Shaks- 
peare, as  may  exist  between  the  Prophecies  and  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  for  two  reasons. 
The  plays  of  our  English  poet  are  so  voluminous  that  they  might  be  expected  to  exhaust  even 
his  vocabulary,  while  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  could  not  possibly  call  into  use  all  the  words 
and  expressions  at  the  command  of  a  writer  or  speaker  of  even  ordinary  fluency.  And  again, 
there  is  less  difference  between  the  blank  verse  of  Shakspeare's  plays  and  the  rhymed  verse 
of  his  poetry,  than  there  is  between  the  poetry  of  the  Prophecies  and  that  of  the  Lamentations. 
Shakspeare  had  occasion  to  employ  over  and  over  again  in  his  dramas  the  very  words  that  must 
be  repeated  in  his  poems :  while  Jeremiah  would  need  for  his  Lamentations  a  diction  to  a  great 
extent  unlike  that  in  which  his  Prophecies  were  composed.  Yet  in  the  very  first  stanza  of  Venus 
and  Adonis,  consisting  of  six  lines,  there  are  four  instances  of  words  or  expressions  that  do  not 
occur  in  the  plays  of  the  dr&m&tist,  purple-colored  face,  weeping  morn,  hied,  sick-thoughted,  and 
two  that  occur  only  once  in  his  plays,  rose-cheeked  and  bold-faced.  In  the  first  stanza  of  Tar(]uin 
and  Lucrece,  consistmg  of  seven  lines,  there  are  three  instances  of  words  not  found  in  the  plays, 
trustless,  lust-breathing,  and  lightless.  With  such  facts  as  these  before  us,  we  ought  to  be  pre- 
pared for  great  novelties  in  the  style  and  language  of  the  Lamentations.  And  yet  we  will  find 
that  what  Dr.  Naegelsbach  has  so  elaborately  spread  out  before  us  as  novelties,  may  be 
classified  under  the  following  six  heads. 

(1).  New  combinations  of  words  familiar  to  the  writer  and  occurring  with  more  or  less  fre- 
quency in  his  Prophecies.  These  seldom  involve  real  differences  in  language  and  style,  and  it  is 
unfair  to  cite  them  as  such.  They  are  in  nearly  every  instance  similarities  in  the  habit  of  the 
writer's  phraseology,  that  prove  his  identity.  When  we  find  in  Venus  and  Adonis  expressions 
like  these,  loaded- satiety,  time-beguiling,  ashy  pale,  blue-veined,  thick- sighted,  or,  in  Tarquin  and 
Lucrece,  silver  melting  dew,  high-pitched,  all  too  timeless,  death-boding,  do  we  doubt  whether 
Shakspeare  wrote  these  poems,  because  these  particular  combinations  of  familiar  words  do  not 
occur  in  his  plays?  The  rery  first  specifications  of  Naegelsbach  are  of  this  character, 
^^  "^^1  2ind  D'U5  '^3^,  i.  1.  These  are,  in  fact,  indications  of  Jeremiah's  authorship.  For  the 
writer  who  used  the  expression  in  Jer.  li.  13,  n'lViX  r\3^,  full  of  treasures,  would  be  very  likely 
to  say  D^  '•0|"^,  ft^^^  of  people ;  and  the  writer,  who  was  accustomed  to  the  use  of  3T  in  the  sense 
of  great  (Jer.  xli.  1 ;  xxxii.  19),  would  be  very  likely  to  follow  the  phrase  D;;  ''ri3"i  with  this 
other  phrase,  involving  a  poetical  play  upon  the  word  and  a  pleasant  repetition  of  sound  to  the 
ear,  D'lJ?  Til.  great  among  the  nations.  To  specify  J'lO,  i.  3,  as  a  peculiarity  of  style,  is  a  spe- 
cies of  literary  trifling  unworthy  of  the  name  of  argument.  Any  writer  might  connect  so  com- 
mon a  preposition  with  a  familiar  noun.  If  Jeremiah  did  it  only  once,  so  Isaiah  in  all  his 
writings  uses  this  expression  once,  and  only  once  (xxiv.  22).  Besides,  ^'liD  occurs  twenty-one 
times,  scattered  throughout  the  Bible  from  Genesis  to  Zechariah.  ''?^  "^IX},  i-  5,  involves  a  pe- 
culiarity of  construction  as  likely  to  be  perpetrated  by  the  writer  of  Jer.  xxii.  22  and  xxx.  16, 
who  says  OT  ■'3K'|,  as  by  any  one  else.  Many  of  the  specifications  given  by  Dr.  Naegelsbach 
lull  under  this  first  head,  and  are,  in  fact,  strong  evidences  of  Jeremiah's  authorship. 

(2).  A  word  not  occurring  in  Jeremiah's  prophecies  (perhaps  not  in  any  other  Scriptures), 
simply  because  the  idea  it  represents  does  not  oi'cur.  Thus  in  i.  1,  rntJ/,  princess,  is  the  only  place 
in  the  whole  Bible  where  a  princess  is  distinctly  indicated.  Hence  the  word  occurs  only  here 
Is  it  fair  to  put  this  down  as  an  indication  of  style?     In  fact,  however,  we  claim  the  evidence  of 


30  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


this  very  word  in  behalf  of  the  traditional  theory.  For  the  word  in  the  plural,  iTnty,  princesses, 
was  familiar  to  Jeremiah  in  the  other  Scriptures.  If  he  never  used  it  in  his  prophecies,  it  was 
because  he  had  no  occasion  to  do  so  :  but  he  does  use  the  verb  from  which  it  is  derived  and  other 
derivatives  from  it ;  and  so  often  does  the  word  "^i^,  for  a  prince,  ruler,  chieftain,  or  distinguished 
person,  occur  in  his  prophecies,  that  we  should  expect  the  feminine  form  of  that  word,  Hity,  would 
be  most  likely  to  occur  to  the  mind  of  the  author  of  those  prophecies,  when,  for  the  first  time,  he 
desired  to  speak  of  a  princess. — The  word  ^J'""?,  province,  i.  1,  does  not  occur  in  the  prophecies, 
because  Jeremiah  had  no  occasion  to  use  it  in  that  book.  In  Venus  and  Adonis  we  read  for  the 
first  time  in  Shakspeare  of  a  dive  dapper,  a  much  more  uncommon  word  in  English  literature 
than  njno  is  in  Hebrew. — The  word  'n^  clieek,  i.  2,  Jeremiah  had  no  occasion  to  use  in  his 
prophecies.  When  for  the  first  time  he  would  speak  of  the  cheek,  what  word  should  he  use,  but 
the  only  one  used  by  the  inspired  Scriptures  with  which  he  was  familiar?  See  Deut.  xviii.  3  ; 
1  Kings  xxii.  24;  (2  Chron.  xviii.  23) ;  Job  xvi.  10;  Cant.  i.  10;  v.  13;  Is.  i.  6;  Mic.  iv.  14. 
(The  word  occurs  in  thirteen  other  places,  where  it  seems  to  mean  the  jaiv.)  This  word, 
therefore,  gives  all  the  testimony  that  can  be  extracted  from  it,  in  favor  of  Jeremiah,  and  not 
against  him. 

(3).  Forcible  expressions  that  occur  in  other  Scriptures  extant  in  Jeremiah's  times,  which  he, 
therefore,  would  not  be  unlikely  to  repeat;  sometimes  indeed  they  may  be  intended  as  quota- 
tions.— DH^?  r?*.  there  is  no  comforter,  i.  2.  See  Eccl.  iv.  1.  If  Solomon  years  before  had  used 
the  expression  and  given  it  currency  in  the  Hebrew  language,  is  it  strange  that  Jeremiah  re- 
peated it  ?  Or  if  Solomon  was  allowed  to  use  it  only  once  in  the  whole  book  of  Ecclesiastes, 
without  risking  his  title  to  the  authorship  of  that  book,  may  not  Jeremiah  be  permitted  to  use 
it  in  only  one  chapter  of  all  his  writings  ?  Or,  if  there  is  any  thing  in  the  argument  at  all,  ought 
we  not  to  conclude  that  the  author  of  the  first  chapter  of  Lamentations  could  not  have  written 
the  other  chapters,  because  this  unique  expression  occurs  five  times  in  the  first  chapter  and  not 
at  all  in  the  others  ? — 00^  >^^]'^,  became  tributary,  i.  1.  This  phrase  was  familiar  to  Jeremiah 
in  Gen.  xlix.  15 ;  Josh.  xvi.  10 ;  Deut.  xx.  11,  besides  many  similar  expressions  in  the  old 
Scriptures. 

(4).  Words  so  familiar  to  the  common  dialect  of  Jeremiah's  times,  that  their  use  by  him  can 
occasion  no  surprise,  though  they  do  not  occur  in  his  prophecies. — We  find  in  the  Venus  and 
Adonis  words  like  the  following,  which  do  not  occur  in  Shakspeaee's  plays :  saddle  bow,  toy 
as  a  verb,  stalled  up  (he  uses  the  noun  stall  often,  the  verb  stall  only  once,  but  stall  up  never,  a 
point  our  German  critics  would  make  very  emphatic,  if  discussing  the  authorship  of  this  poem), 
unripe,  overswayed,  overruled  in  the  sense  of  ruling  over  another,  uncontrolled  in  the  sense  of 
unconquered,  dishevelled,  spright,  souring,  disliking  as  an  adjective,  etc.  Yet  who  that  is  ac- 
quainted with  the  literature  of  the  times  in  which  the  great  dramatist  lived,  discovers  any  thing 
remarkable  in  his  use  of  these  words?  Neither  should  it  surprise  us  that  Jeremiah  has  nap- 
pened  not  to  use  many  current  words  in  his  prophecies,  which  he  has  chosen  to  use  in  the  La- 
mentations. For  example,  'JJ^,.  of  which  we  shall  speak  again.  •TiJ^i'.,  i.  3,  which  occurs  in 
Ex.  twelve,  in  Lev.  five,  in  Num.  thirteen,  in  1  Chron.  eight,  in  2  Chron.  three,  and  in  Ez.  two 
times,  and  once  in  Gen.,  in  Deut.  and  in  Is.  So  niJO,  i.  3,  is  found  in  Gen.  viii.  9 ;  Deut.  xxviii. 
65 ;  Ruth  lii.  1 ;  1  Chron.  vi.  16 ;  Is.  xxxiv.  14. 

(5).  Slight  grammatical  variations,  licenses  allowed  every  poet;  the  use  of  a  verb  in  a 
tense  in  which  it  does  not  happen  to  occur  in  the  prophecies ;  the  use  of  nouns  as  adjectives, 
or  vice  versa ;  and  similar  peculiarities. — i.  3,  nUD  instead  of  nniJD ;  ver.  4,  the  ending 
V- ;  ii.  13,  «£)"<  construed  with  S ;  ver.  14,  Hin  without  XIC^ ;  iii.  6,  Hiph.  of  133,  etc.  As 
well  might  we  question  the  authorship  of  Venus  and  Adonis,  because  Shakspeare,  often  as 
he  uses  the  verb  hie,  never  in  his  plays  has  the  preterite  hied ;  nor  'miss  for  misbehaviour  ;  nor 
the  participle  distilling,  though  he  has  distil  four  times,  distilled  ten,  distillative  and  disfilment 
each  once;  nor  the  adjective  sappy  :  nor  the  participle  souring  :  or  the  authorship  of  Tarquin 
*nd  Lucrece,  because  in  the  plays  the  adjectives  made  out  of  nouns,  trustless,  lightless,  bateless, 


•ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  31 


do  not  occur ;  nor  does  the  verb  stows,  though  the  participle  stowed  occurs  three  times  ;  nor  the 
verb  cypher,  though  the  noun  does ;  nor  the  noun  blur,  though  the  verb  does ;  nor  do  the  par- 
ticiples parling,  pawning.  We  must  remember,  too,  that  the  inflections  of  Hebrew  words,  the 
changes  produced  by  affixes  and  sufiixes,  and  the  omission  or  retention  of  vowel  consonants, 
give  a  greater  variety  of  grammatical  forms  than  our  English  words  can  possibly  undergo. 

(6).  The  exactions  of  poetry,  and  especially  of  the  very  artificial  structure  of  this  poem. — 
Though  the  Lamentations  may  not  be  strictly  rhythmical,  yet  the  sentences  are  carefully  ba- 
lanced. There  is,  too,  an  evident  regard  to  melody  in  the  choice  of  words,  il^^i!  and  niJO  in 
i.  3,  each  occurring  at  the  cesura,  and  both  harmonizing  with  other  words  in  the  verse,  show 
that  the  phraseology  was  influenced  by  regard  to  melodiousness.  In  spite  of  the  loss  of  the 
correct  pronunciation  of  Hebrew,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  of  this.  Thus  we  might  ac- 
count for  DD1K',  iii.  11,  by  the  pleasing  alliteration.  The  necessities  of  the  alphabetical  construc- 
tion sometimes  affected  the  choice  of  words,  as  we  seem  to  see  in  the  repetition  of  vav  conversive 
in  iii.  16-18,  and  of  "nJ  in  vers.  7  and  9.  This  may  account  for  the  abrupt  introduction  of  the 
bear,  y^,  in  ver.  10,  where  the  lion  would  have  been  quite  sufficient,  if  the  acrostic  had  not  in- 
vited the  bear  to  come  too. 

If,  now,  keeping  these  rules  in  mind,  the  following  catalogue  is  carefully  examined,  there 
will  be  found  in  it  little  to  weaken  our  confidence  in  the  traditional  opinion  that  Jeremiah  wrote 
the  Lamentations,  and  some  things  that  will  strengthen  that  belief. 

When  our  fervent  popular  preacher  leaves  the  pulpit,  whence  he  had  been  accustomed 
to  address  the  masses  on  the  passing  events  of  the  day,  or  from  which  he  poured  forth  in- 
struction, warning,  invective  and  exhortation  adapted  to  produce  immediate  effects;  and  comes, 
as  it  were,  to  recite  before  a  listening  world  a  dirge  on  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  that  has  been 
carefully  prepared,  according  to  the  most  artificial  rules  of  poetry,  known  and  practised  in  his 
day, — we  expect  to  see  him,  not  in  his  "  home-costume,"  but  dressed  for  the  occasion,-^we  ex- 
pect, nay  we  demand,  that  his  poem  shall  exhibit  in  its  phraseology,  as  well  as  in  its  thoughts, 
the  results  of  a  careful  premeditated  selection  of  words  and  phrases,  that  may  often  lie  beyond 
the  habit  of  his  customary  "  unconscious  and  undesigned  "  way  of  speaking  and  writing. 
Judged  by  this  rule,  even  the  long  list  of  variations  enumerated  above,  were  they  all  found  to 
be  actual  evidences  of  a  difi'erence  of  style,  should  not  appal  us  or  drive  us  to  the  conclusion 
that  Jeremiah  could  not  have  been  the  author  of  Lamentations.  But  in  point  of  fact,  the  long 
catalogue  given  above  contains  comparatively  few  evidences  of  even  verbal  difi^erences  between 
the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  the  Book  of  Lamentations  ;  and  none  that  may  not  be  ex- 
plained consistently  with  the  theory  that  Jeremiah  wrote  Lamentations.  Take  out  of  that 
catalogue  all  the  ana^  Isyofisva  (and  Jeremiah's  prophecies  will  show  such  a  list  of  these,  as 
may  raise  the  question  whether  their  occurrence  is  not  a  characteristic  of  his  style  ?)  ;  all  the 
repetitions  of  the  same  word  or  phrase,  as  there  is  no  comforter ;  all  the  words  for  which  no 
synonym  or  equivalent  occurs  in  the  prophecies,  and  where  of  course  the  introduction  of  new 
words  was  inevitable,  b,s princess, province,  cheek;  all  the  combinations  of  common  words  into 
new  expressions  that  any  writer  of  ordinary  ability  is  constantly  producing,  and  that  do  not 
really  amount  to  peculiarities  of  diction,  as  full  of  people,  great  among  the  nations;  and  all 
slight  grammatical  changes  that  cannot  be  regarded  as  novelties  in  a  writer  who  uses  the  same 
grammatical  forms  in  other  words,  as  the  changes  effected  on  words  used  in  the  prophecies  by 
number,  gender,  mood,  tense,  or  the  particles  attached  to  them,  or  the  prepositions  with  which  they 
are  construed  ;  remove  all  these  from  the  catalogue,  which  ought  to  be  thus  sifted  before  we  can 
reach  the  truthful  result  of  our  analysis,  and  we  shall  find  little  left  on  which  to  rest  an  argu- 
ment against  the  authorship  of  Jeremiah.  What  the  residuum  would  be,  may  be  discovered  in 
the  twenty-four  instances  (see  p.  13)  on  which  Dr.  Naegelsbach  has  taken  his  last  stand,  and 
which  he  evidently  regards  as  constituting  the  strongest  evidences  in  the  whole  Book  that  Jere- 
miah did  not  write  it.  These  words  then  claim  special  attention.  If  it  can  be  shown  that  they 
are  not  incompatible  with  the  fact  of  Jeremiah's  authorship,  it  is  not  likely  that  any  other  words 
or  phrases  in  the  whole  catalogue  are.  'y'''^,  appears  only  twice  and  then  in  close  connection 
in  Lam.  iii.  35,  38.     In  both  instances  it  seems  to  designate  God  (though  some,  as  Blayney, 


82  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH, 


give  it  a  different  sense  in  ver.  35)  ;  but  it  is  applied  to  God  as  a  descriptive  title,  rather  than 
as  a  name.  God  is  spoken  of  as  the  High  One,  He  is  not  addressed  as  such.  That  the  author 
of  Lamentations  does  not  call  upon  God  by  this  title,  by  which  He  is  designated  in  Deut.  xxxii. 
8,  and  in  many  of  the  Psalms,  might  be  claimed  as  a  coincidence  between  this  book  and  tht; 
prophecies  of  Jeremiah.  But  the  argument  that  Jeremiah  would  not  be  likely  to  apply  to  God 
a  word  he  himself  uses  (xxii.  2 ;  xxxvi.  10),  and  which  is  so  constantly  associated  with  God  in 
the  old  Scriptures  (see  Gen.  xiv.  18,  19,  20,  22 ;  Num.  xxiv.  16),  and  which  Jeremiah  the  pious 
priest  and  prophet,  must  have  so  often  used  in  the  liturgical  Psalms  (vii.  18;  ix.  3;  xxi.  8; 
xlvi.  5,  etc.)  is  too  feeble  to  withstand  the  first  assault.  The  citation  of  the  next  word  "J^X, 
without  any  allusion  to  the  question  of  its  genuineness,  does  not  seem  entirely  ingenuous. 
Certain  it  is  that  many  MSS.,  some  early  editions  and  some  of  the  older  versions  have  Hiri'  in- 
stead of  'J^X  in  every  one  of  the  fourteen  places  referred  to  in  the  Lamentations.  The  evidence 
in  favor  of  this  reading  is  so  strong  that  in  every  instance  Blayney  translates  Jehovah,  and 
BooTHROYD,  in  his  critical  Hebrew  Bible,  marks  'J^X  as  a  probable  corruption.  If  we  consider 
the  reluctance  with  which  the  Jews  would  regard  the  connection  of  the  name  of  Jehovah  with 
the  judgments  befalling  themselves,  we  can  imagine  that  doubts  as  to  the  TT,)p]  and  suggestions 
of  'J'^?*,  may  have  passed  in  the  course  of  transcription  from  the  margin  into  the  text.  But  on 
the  supposition  that  'J^X  may  be  the  true  reading,  it  is  not  impossible  to  reconcile  this  with 
Jeremiah's  authorship.  Though  Jeremiah  may  have  preferred  to  connect  with  "'J"^8<  the  name  of 
nirr,  yet  in  this  poem  the  artificial  style  (see  Rule  6,  p.  81)  requiring  short  terse  sentences 
may  have  forbidden  his  usual  habit.  Yet  for  the  sake  of  variety  of  expression,  or  afi'ected  by 
that  indefinable  taste  that  guides  the  poet  and  which  we  may  not  be  able  always  to  detect  in 
reading  a  foreign  language,  especially  one  the  original  pronunciation  of  which  is  lost,  Jeremiah 
may  have  preferred  to  write  ""J^^^  alone,  instead  of  TVT}]  alone.  The  likelihood  that  the  choice 
of  this  word  was  influenced  by  the  arbitrary  rules  of  his  poem  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact 
that  the  word  always  takes  an  important  accent.  Or  again,  Jeremiah  may  have  been  reluctant 
to  connect  the  covenant  name  of  God,  the  name  associated  with  promise,  grace  and  favor,  with 
the  fierce  and  destructive  judgments  that  destroyed  His  own  people  and  His  own  Temple.  The 
remarks  of  Wordswoeth  on  the  use  of  this  name  in  the  prophecies  give  us  a  sufficient  reason, 
if  one  is  needed,  why  Jeremiah  should  depart  from  his  usual  custom  and  omit  T^^p\  after  'J^X- 
"  The  prophet  appears  thus  to  intimate  in  the  Lamentations,  that  now,  in  her  captivity  and  hu- 
miliation, Jerusalem  felt  the  lordship  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel ;  but  by  reason  of  her 
sins,  no  longer  felt  that  lordship  to  be  exercised  by  Him  as  Jehovah,  i.  e.  as  the  God  of  His 
covenanted  people,  to  protect  them  "  (note  on  Lam.  i.  14).  The  other  words  need  not  detain  U8 
long.  tD'3n  occurs  five  times.  Each  time  it  is  emphatic,  and  three  times  it  is  intended  to  inten- 
sify the  meaning  of  HXT,  i.  11,  12 ;  v.  1.  It  is  well  chosep  for  this  purpose,  nor  do  the  prophe- 
cies of  Jeremiah  suggest  a  word  that  both  in  form  and  sense  would  have  been  equally  efi"ective 
in  these  places.  The  word  itself  must  have  been  familiar  to  Jeremiah  and  according  to  Rule  4, 
p,  30,  cannot  be  regarded  as  a  peculiarity  of  style  It  occurs  in  Genesis  three  times,  Exodus 
two,  Numbers  three,  1  Samuel  four,  1  Kings  three,  2  Kings  once,  1  Chronicles  once,  Job  three 
times,  Psalms  seventeen,  Proverbs  once,  Isaiah  fifteen  times,  Amos  once,  Habakkuk  five  times, 
and  Jonah  three.  'J;?.  and  the  verb  from  which  it  is  derived  ru>|.  This  is  not  exactly  accurate. 
Jeremiah  uses  the  verb  HJj;  in  its  usual  meaning  of  answering  frequently,  vii- 13,  27 ;  xi.  5; 
xiv,  7;  xxiii.  35,  hi;  xxx.  3;  xxv.  17;  xlii  4;  xliv.  20:  and  the  derivatives  from  it  in  that 
sense,  "{jn  fourteen  times,  I^I  eleven  times.  He  also  uses  n^J^  in  the  intensive  sense  of  shout- 
ing, xxv.  30;  xi,  14.  But  what  is  more  to  our  purpose  is,  that  once  at  least  he  uses  the  deri- 
vation 'V,  poor,  miserable,  xxii.  16,  from  HJj;  in  the  sense  of  being  bowed-down,  oppressed. 
He  thus  at  least  recognizes  the  root  of  "^\,  and  if  in  only  one  single  verse  of  his  prophecies  we 
find  'Jj;,  miserable,  shall  we  be  surprised  that  in  only  one  part  of  his  writings  we  find  'J^,  affiic- 
iionf     Besides,  this  word  also,  according  to  Rule  4,  p.  30,  cannot  be  regarded  ae  a  test  of  au- 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  33 


thorship.     See  Gen.  xvi.  11;  xxix.  32;  xxxi.  42;  xli.  52;  Ex.  iii.  7,  17;  iv.  31 ;  Deut.  xvi.  3; 
xxvi.  7 ;  Isa.  xlviii.  10,  and  other  books  of  the  older  Scriptures.     Q^'M^,     This  word  may  be  re- 
garded as  quite  characteristic  of  Jeremiah  ;  for  he  uses  it  in  so  many  of  its  forms :  in  Kal  pret. 
ii.  12;  fui.  xviii.  16;  xix.  8;  xlix.  17;  1.  13;  in  Niphal  prel.  iv.  9;  xii.  11;  part,  xxxiii.  10; 
in  Hiphil^re^.  x.  25;  fuL  xlix.  20.     Why  then  may  he  not  also  use  it  in   Kal  participle  (see 
Rule  5,  p.  31),  especially  since  he  had  before  him  the  examples  of  2  Sam.  xiii.  20;  Isa.  xlix.  8, 
19 ;  liv.  1 ;  Ixi.  4  bis,  and  since  his  cotemporary  Ezekiel  twice  used  this  participial  form,  xxxvi. 
3,4?     (See  Rule  4,  p.  30).     nr.     Jeremiah  uses  the  derivative  ^U',  viii.  18;  xx.  18;  xxxi. 
13 ;  xlv.  3  ;  and  was  familiar  with  the  verb  (Rule  4,  p.  30)  in  Isa.  li.  23 ;  Job  xix.  2  and  his  co- 
temporary  Zephaniah  iii.  18,     nJX.     See  Joel  i.  18 ;  Ex.  ii.  23 ;  Prov.  xxix.  2,  which  passages 
may  have  been  in  his  mind  (see  Rule  3,  p.  30).     See  the  word  also  (Rule  4,  p.  30)  in  Isa.  xxiv. 
7 ;  Ez.  ix.  4  ;  xxi.  11  bis,  12.     nJT  is  used  three  times,  the  first  time  as  the  initial  word  of  li.  7, 
when  the  mind  of  the  writer  would  be  going  out  in  search  of  a  suitable  word,  and  not  following 
the  unconscious  flow  of  thought  and   expression ;  see  Rule  6,  p.  31.     Having  used  it  once,  it 
would  readily  occur  to  him  again,  when  the  sense  suited ;  and  it  may  be  observed  that  the 
second  time  it  is  used,  it  stands  as  an  initial  word,  iii.  17,  just  where  an  unusual  word  would  be 
expected,  although  the  initial  letter  of  its  root  is  not  there  required.     How  familiar  it  was  to 
the  dialect  of  his  times  (Rule  4,  p.  30)  may  be  judged  from  Hosea  viii.  3,  5  and  its  occurrence 
in  many  Psalms  and  in  the  Chronicles.     NtJn  here  again  we  have  a  word  first  appearing  as  an 
initial,  i.  8,  and  once  repeated,  iii.  39,  to  which  the  remarks  made  on  last  word  will  apply.     It 
might  be  said  that  i^X^n,  which  is  used  in  the  prophecies,  would  have  afi'orded  the  proper  initial 
letter.     N£?n  may  have  been  preferred  for  its  brevity,  and  as  a  matter  of  taste  on  account  of 
nxan  immediately  following.     Its  frequent  occurrence  in  the  Pentateuch  and  its  use  by  Amos 
and  Isaiah  would  meet  the  requirements  of  Rule  4.     As  there  is  an  acknowledged  mistake  in 
the  K'thib  iii.  39,  it  is  not  impossible  that  the  correct  reading  there  is  riNDn  instead  of  the 
accepted  K'ri.     "lOnD.     Jeremiah  in  his  prophecies  uses  nnon  only  three  times  and  then  in  an 
abstract  sense,  iii.  19  ;  xii.  10  ;  xxv,  34.     The  use  of  ^0^D  in  Joel  iv.  5  ;  Cant.  v.  16  ;  Hos.  ix. 
6,  16,  seems  to  designate  that  word  as  better  chosen  for  the  idea  meant  to  be  expressed.     See 
Rule  4  above.    ^2^,  here  again  we  have  a  word  first  occurring  as  an  initial  ii.  2,  where  the 
Poet  is  deliberately  choosing  the  best  and  most  forcible  word  for  his  purpose  and  not  writing  un- 
constrainedly.     The  Prophet  once  uses  the  verb  in  the  Kal,  li.  34.     May  he  not  then  use  it  in 
the  Piel,  when  tnai!  form  is  better  suited  to  his  purpose,  especially  since  Habakkuk  and  Isaiah 
and  older  writers  set  him  the  example  ? 

Son  id,  li.  2,  17.  Because  Jeremiah  once  said  DHJ  xS,  xx.  16,  and  once  'Donj  nS,  iv.  28 
are  we  to  assume  that  he  could  not  twice  say  Spn  K'S  ?  The  argument  is  not  only  worthless, 
it  is  truthless,  for  Jeremiah  does  say,  xiii.  14,  Vmnx  N'S,  and  xxi.  7,  ^bn'_  x'?,  besides  often  using 
the  word  Son.  We  claim  this  phrase,  therefore,  as  distinctively  characteristic  of  Jeremiah. 
"'^JJ,  dust,  ii.  10.  Could  not  Jeremiah  repeat  a  word  made  classical  in  Job  ii.  12,  iBj;  ^pilM 
on'K/N^-S^,  and  write  Qm^~hii  ^SJ^  •I'^Jjf^n?  See  Rule  3,  p.  30.  But  it  so  happens  that  Je- 
remiah in  his  prophecies  has  no  occasion  to  use  an  equivalent  word,  he  does  not  speak  of  the 
dust,  and  therefore  according  to  Rule  2,  p.  29,  this  is  no  indication  of  his  habit  of  speech. 
^0^.  This  word  occurs  only  in  Genesis,  Job,  Psalms,  Isaiah,  Jonah  and  Lam.  The  Niphal 
form  is  found  only  in  Lam.  ii.  11,  the  Kal.  part,  plural,  in  Gen.  xxx.  42,  Lam.  ii.  19,  the  Hith- 
pael  in  Jon.  ii.  8,  Lam.  ii.  12.  We  can  imagine  no  valid  reason  why  Jeremiah  might  not  have 
used  it.  nm,  which  occurs  twice  in  ii.  14,  is  not  found  in  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  but  it* 
derivative  Y>r\  is,  Jer.  xiv.  14,  xxiii.  16,  It  is  used  by  Isaiah  often,  by  Amos,  Micah,  Ha- 
bakkuk and  Ezekiel,  and  is  also  found  in  the  Pentateuch,  in  Job,  Psalms  and  Proverbs.  See 
Rule  4,  p.  30.  nvi3  occurs  twice,  ii.  16,  iii.  46,  both  times  as  an  initial  word.  See  Rule  6,  p. 
31,  and  with  the  same  connecting  words.  If  the  word  does  not  occur  in  the  prophecies  of 
3 


34  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

Jeremiah,  neither  is  the  same  idea  exactly  expressed.  Hence  they  contain  no  equivalent  for 
this  expression  of  opening  the  mouth  against  one.  See  Rule  2,  p.  29.  We  have  the  same 
words  in  Ps.  xxii.  14.      nV£3  with  HiJ  is  used  Gen.  iv.  11 ;  Deut.  xi.  6 ;   Num.  xvi.  30.     See  the 

T  T  V 

word  also  in  Jud.  xi.  35,  36  ;  Job  xxxv.  16 ;  Isa.  x.  14  ;  Ez.  ii.  8  ;  Ps.  Ixvi.  14  ;  cxliv.  10,  11. 
Rule  4,  p.  30.  '^Ir'n.  Jeremiah  in  his  prophecies  seems  to  have  had  occasion  to  use  a  substantive 
for  darkness  only  three  times  ;  and  each  time  he  used  a  different  one,  xiii.  16,  73^;^;  xxiii.  12, 
n'7£)X ;  ii.  31,  n'73^{0.     It  cannot  be  said,  therefore,  that  any  one  of  these  words  was  character- 

T--:  '  '      t:"-:|-  ■' 

istic  of  his  style,  but  on  the  contrary,  the  choice  of  a  new  word,  so  far  as  the  evidence  goes,  is 
characteristic  of  his  style.  Besides,  he  uses  the  verb  '^^n,  and  was  familiar  with  the  noun  in 
the  sacred  Scriptures.  See  Rule  4.  Nor  is  it  improbable,  as  Naeqelsbach  himself  suggests, 
that  the  words  "^ix  X"?!  ■^jiyn,  in  Am.  v.  18,  20 ;  Job  xii.  25,  were  in  his  mind.  See  Rule  3,  p. 
30.  nJUJ.  Jeremiah  did  not  use  this  word  in  the  prophecies,  because  he  had  no  occasion  to 
do  so.  In  that  book  there  is  no  equivalent  for  it.  See  Rule  2,  p.  29.  He  found  the  word 
ready  for  him  when  he  wanted  it,  in  Job,  Psalms,  Isaiah  and  Habakkuk.  See  Rule  4.  'T\\ 
See  again  Rule  4. 

D'J£)  aiyi.  This  phrase  is  frequent  elsewhere,  aa  Dr.  Naegelsbach  allows.  See  Rule  4. 
And  observe,  moreover,  how  the  use  of  the  expression  is  induced  by  the  poetry.  The  initial 
word  of  the  verse,  iv.  16,  is  'J3^  this  is  repeated  in  the  second  member  to  mark  the  parallelism. 
The  whole  construction  of  the  verse  is  verbally  artful,  and  should  we  grant  that  the  phrase  is 
not  idiomatic  with  Jeremiah,  we  could  still  account  for  his  use  of  it  in  this  particular  passage. 
ioS.  This  is  simply  a  rare  form  that  might  be  adopted  by  Jeremiah,  as  well  as  another. 
See  Gen.  ix.  26,  27 ;  Isa.  xliv.  15  ;  liii.  8 ;  Ps.  xxviii.  8.  ^  relat.  The  use  of  this  prefix  is 
characteristic  of  Ecclesiastes  and  the  Canticles,  yet  if  Solomon  was  the  author  of  those  books, 
and  also  of  the  Proverbs  and  the  seventy- second  Psalm,  he  could  at  pleasure  drop  this  peculi- 
arity. Why  then  may  not  Jeremiah  be  allowed  to  use  the  abbreviated  relative  four  times  in 
the  Lamentations,  without  impeaching  his  title  to  its  authorship  ?  "  The  occurrence  of  ityx  in 
Judg.  V.  27  casts  no  suspicion  on  the  genuineness  of  that  verse,  though  B'  is  used  elsewhere  in 
the  Song  of  Deborah,  ver.  7.  Nor,  on  the  other  hand,  does  a  single  ^,  where  "ij^«  is  the  pre- 
vailing form,  discredit  Gen.  vi.  3,  or  Job  xix.  29"  (Lange's  Song  of  Sol.  Introd.  I  1,  Dr. 
Green's  note).  The  constant  tendency  to  rhythm,  at  least  the  terseness  of  style,  is  sufficient 
for  the  adoption  of  a  form  here,  which  the  less  compressed  poetry  of  the  Prophecies  did  not 
require.  The  abbreviations  'gan  and  ^miss  both  occurring  near  the  beginning  of  Venus  and 
Adoqis,  constitute  no  ground  on  which  to  rest  an  argument  with  reference  to  the  author  of  that 
poem.  See  Rule  6,  p.  31.  Finally,  y^P'^  without  a  suffix.  This  happens  once  in  the  Lamen- 
tations, iii.  45.  The  same  thing  happens  elsewhere  in  the  Old  Testament  sixty-one  times,  in 
Genesis,  Exodus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Joshua,  Judges,  1  Samuel,  1  Kings,  Psalms,  Pro- 
verbs, Isaiah,  Joel,  Amos,  Micah  and  Habakkuk  ;  and  Jeremiah  himself  is  once  imprudent 
enough  to  use  ^^pD,  vi.  1,  without  a  suffix.— The  conclusion  to  which  we  are  forced,  after  this 
too  patient  examination  is,  that  the  phraseology  of  the  Lamentations  is  beyond  all  doubt  com- 
patible with  the  tradition  that  Jeremiah  the  Prophet  was  their  author. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  striking  verbal  analogies  between  the  book  of  the  Prophecies  of 
Jeremiah  and  the  Book  of  Lamentations,  sufficient  of  themselves  to  convince  us,  that  the  two 
Books  are  the  productions  of  one  author.  What  has  been  remarked  of  Jeremiah's  writings  gener- 
ally is  found  to  be  true  of  the  Lamentations  also, — "  his  language  abounds  in  Aramaic  forms,  loses 
sight  of  the  fine  grammatical  distinctions  of  the  earlier  Hebrews,  includes  many  words  not  found 
in  its  vocabulary  (Eichhorn,  Einl.  in  das  A.  T.,  III.  121),"  (Smith's  Bib.  Diet.,  art.  Jeremiah). 
Carl  Feiedrich  Keil,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  gives  us  the  following  speci- 
mens, by  way  of  example,  of  characteristic  words  and  phrases  common  to  both  books.  "  ""^IJO 
3'3Dr3.  ii.  22,  compare  with  TaDD  liJD,  Jer.  vi.  25;  xx.  3, 10;  xlvi.  5;  xlix.  29;  the  frequent  use 
of  "131?  and  'Pi'T*!  l3Cf,  ii.  11,  13;  iii.  47,  48;  iv.  10,  compared  with  Jer.  iv.  6,  20;  vi.  1,  14; 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  35 

viii.  11,  21 ;  xiv.  17  ;  xxx.  12,  etc. ;  D:a  nr,  or  n^'OT  nr,  i.  16 ;  ii.  11, 18  ;  iii.  48, 49,  compared 
with  Jer.  viii.  23;  ix.  17  ;  xiii.  17  ;  xiv.  17.  Compare  io  full  such  passages  as  iii.  14,  and  Jer. 
XX.  7:  iii.  15,  and  Jer.  ix.  14;  xxiii.  15:  iii,  47,  and  Jer.  xlviii.  43:  iii.  52,  and  Jer.  xvi.  16  : 
iv.  21,  and  Jer.  xxv.  15,  27  :  and  i.  8,  9,  and  Jer.  xiii.  21,  26.  Besides,  only  a  few  peculiar  words 
occur  as  nj5t??J,  i.  14 ;  3^jl?;,  ii.  1  ;  Ontr,  iii.  8 ;  B'3|,  iii.  10  ;  nav,  iv.  8  ;  nSxn,  and  ^S-njJD,  iii. 
65 ;  and  peculiar  forms  of  words,  as  ri3U?D,  i.  7 ;  D'nno,  ii.  14 ;  HJIi),  ii.  18  ;  iii.  49,  etc" 
{Einleit.,  I  127,  S.  379).  We  need  only  refer  to  Dr.  Naeqelsbach's  own  Commentary  for 
abounding  evidences  of  coincidences  in  the  use  of  language  in  the  two  books.  He  makes  inces- 
sant reference  to  Jeremiah  for  the  explanation  of  words  and  phrases.  He  often,  tod  with  a 
generous  and  honorable  frankness  that  we  respect  and  admire,  acknowledges  that  peculiar  words 
and  phrases  found  in  Lamentations,  occur  also  in  Jeremiah,  and  sometimes  in  no  other  Hebrew 
writer.  Since,  then  it  is  conceded  that  much  of  the  langua'ge  of  this  book  is  characteristic  of  the 
writings  of  Jeremiah,  and  since  we  have  shown  above,  that  words  and  phrases  used  in  this 
Book,  and  not  found  in  Jeremiah's  Prophecies,  are  not  so  numerous  and  of  such  a  character  as 
to  render  it  incredible  that  Jerpmiah  wrote  this  Book,  it  is  not  necessary  to  delay  the  reader 
longer,  but  leave  the  further  devflopuient  of  this  argument  to  the  following  Commentary. 

Faierson,  N.  J.,  Nov.  1870. 


THE 


LAMENTATIONS   OF   JEEEMIAH. 


Chapter  I. 


lAMENTATION  OF  THE  DAUGHTER  OF  ZION  OVER  THE  RUIN  OF  JERUSALEM  AND  JUDAH  [OR  RATHER, 
THE  LAMENTATION  OF  THE  DAUGHTER  OF  JERUSALEM  OVER  THE  DESTRUCTION  OF  THE  CITY,  THH 
NATION  AND  THE  TEMPLE. — W.  H.  H.]. 

[The  song  is  naturally  divided  into  two  parts  of  equal  length.  Vers,  l-ll  describe  the  wretched  condition  of  the  city. 
Vers.  12-22  are,  more  strictly,  the  lamentation  over  this  condition.  In  both  sections  the  speaker  is  the  ideal  person  of  th« 
genius  or  daughter  of  the  city,  who  twice,  vers.  9,  11,  interrupts  the  description  of  the  first  section,  which  is  given  in  th» 
third  person,  with  an  outcry  of  pain  uttered  in  the  first  person. — W.  H.  H.] 

I.  Vers.  1-11. 
J<  Ver.  1.   How  sitteth  solitary 

The  city  that  was  full  of  people ! 
She  is  become  as  a  widow ! 

She  that  was  great  among  the  nations, 
A  Princess  over  the  Provinces, — 
Is  become  tributary. 
3  Ver.  2.   Bitterly  she  weepeth  in  the  night, 

And  her  tears  are  [constantly]  upon  her  cheeks. 
She  hath  no  comforter 

From  among  all  her  lovers  : 
All  her  friends  have  dealt  treacherously  with  her, 
They  have  become  her  enemies. 

y   Ver.  3.    Judah  is  gone  into  exile, 

From  oppression  and  from  heavy  bondage. 
She  dwelleth  among  the  heathen : 

She  hath  not  found  rest : 
All  her  pursuers  have  overtaken  her 

Amidst  her  straits. 

T  Ver.  4.   The  ways  to  Zion  are  mournful 

Because  none  come  to  her  appointed  service*. 
All  her  gates  are  destroyed. 

Her  priests  sigh : 
Her  virgins  are  sorrowful : 

And  she,  herself, — is  in  bitterness  I 
n  Ver.  5.   Her  adversaries  are  exalted. 
Her  enemies  prosper. 
For  Jehovah  hath  afflicted  her 

For  the  greatness  of  her  sins. 
Her  young  children  are  gone  captives 
Before  the  adversary. 

J7 


88  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


1  Veb.  6.   And  departed  from  the  daughter  of  Zion 

Is  all  her  beauty. 
Her  princes  have  become  like  harts 

That  find  no  pasture, 
And  go,  without  strength. 

Before  the  pursuer. 

i  Veb.  7.  Jerusalem  remembers,  in  the  days  of  her  tribulation  and  of  her  wanderings, 
All  her  pleasant  things  that  she  had  in  the  days  of  old. 
When  her  people  fall  by  the  hand  of  the  adversary 

And  there  is  no  helper  for  her, — 
Her  adversaries  behold  her — 
They  mock  at  her  Sabbaths ! 

n   Ver.  8.  Jerusalem  has  grievously  sinned ; 
Therefore  is  she  become  vile. 
All,  who  honoured  her,  despise  her, 

For  they  see  her  nakedness. 
Yea,  she  herself  sigheth 
And  turneth  backward. 
0  Ver.  9.   Her  filthiness  is  on  her  skirts. 
She  considered  not  her  end. 
Therefore  she  came  down  wonderfiillj 

She  has  no  comforter. 
Behold,  O  Jehovah,  ray  affliction. 

For  the  enemy  magnifieth  himself. 
♦  Ver.  10.  His  hand  has  the  oppressor  stretched  out 
Over  all  her  precious  things  : 
For  she  saw  heathen 

Come  into  her  sanctuary : 
Of  whom  Thou  didst  command 

'  That  they  come  not  into  Thy  congregation.* 
3  Ver.  11.  All  her  people  sigh. 

Seeking  for  bread ; 
They  give  their  precious  things  for  food 

To  sustain  life. 
See,  Jehovah,  and  consider 

How  wretched  I  am  become ! 


ANALYSIS. 

The  logical  construction  it  preserved,  although  rendered  difficult  by  the  constraint  of  the  alphabetical  at' 
rangement  of  the  verses.  From  ver.  1  to  the  last  clause  of  ver.  11,  the  poet  speaks.  [^Rather  the 
poet  puts  this  language  into  the  mouth  of  a  third  person,  who  is  revealed  to  us  in  vers.  9,  11,  and 
still  more  plainly  in  the  ivhole  of  the  second  part,  vers.  12-22,  as  the  ideal  representative  of  the  ruined 
city. — W.  H.  H.]  Vers.  1,  2  present  to  us  the  ideal  person  of  Jerusalem,  sharply  defining  the  con- 
trast between  jvhat  she  was  and  what  she  is  now.  Ver.  (i  personifies  in  like  maimer  the  tribe  of  Judah. 
Vers.  4-6  depict  the  present  condition  of  Jerusalem  in  ruins,  in  the  midst  of  which  description  the  ideal 
person  in  her  grief  is  introduced ;  and  also,  by  way  of  co7itrast,  her  successful  foe  :  the  forsaken  roads 
of  the  city,  the  broken  gates,  the  mourning  priests  and  virgins,  the  exiled  people,  and  especially  the  no- 
bles plunged  from  splendor  into  the  deepest  misery ,  are  the  separate  features  which  compose  this  picture. 
[The  especial  subject  of  this  description  is  not  the  city,  strictly  speaking,  but  Zion,  the  crown  and 
glory  of  the  city.  Around  the  ideal  daughter  of  Zion  all  the  accessories  of  the  picture  are  drawn. 
Jerusalem,  herself,  is  the  immediate  subject  of  the  following  verses. — W.  H.  H.]  Ver.  7  relates  agau' 
to  the  ideal  Jerusalem  and  informs  us  hoiv  she  remembers  with  pain  her  former  estate,  whilst  now  suf 
fering  bitter  mockery  from  her  foes.  Vers.  8,  9  declare  the  cause  of  the  judgment,  already  indicntfil 
in  ver.  5,  namely,  the  heinous  sin  of  Israel:  in  consequence  of  ivhich  sin,  heathen,  ver.  10,  had  in- 
truded into  the  sanctuary  of  Zion,  ivhich  was  forbidden  in  the  law.  Finally,  ver.  11,  to  the  last 
clause,  describes  the  distressing  famine  of  the  besieged  people.  From  the  last  clause  of  ver.  H  to  th» 
end  of  the  chapter,  the  Poet  lets  Zion  herself  speak,  as  she  had  already  done  parenthetically  in  rer.  9, 


CHAP.  I.   1,  2. 


39 


Vers.  1,  2. 

1  How  doth  the  city  sit  solitary,  that  was  full  of  people !  how  is  she  become  as  a 
widow !     She  that  was  great  among  the  nations,  and  princess  among  the  provinces, 

2  how  is  she  become  tributary !  She  weepeth  sore  in  the  night,  and  her  tears  are  on 
her  cheeks  j  among  all  her  lovers  she  hath  none  to  comfort  her :  all  her  friends 
have  dealt  treacherously  with  her,  they  are  become  her  enemies. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL, 
Ver.  1. — nn3,  subst.,  solitariness,  is  to  be  regarded  as  in  the  accusative.    See  iii.  28;  Lev.  xiii.  46;  Jer.  xv.  17;  xlix. 
81,  ^^3'7,  Num.  xxiii.  9  ;  Mic.  vii.  14.— T\3T.     The  ^—  is  archaic.     See  Olsh.,  gl23.  (/.     [In  'mt^  also.     The  paragogic 

TT  :  •    T-  •  •    TT 

' —  was,  originally,  perhaps,  a  mark  of  the  genitive,  as  the  corresponding  letter  in  Arabic.  Occurs  in  poetry  and  in  com- 
pound names,  as  pIIl~''J/lN.  p^2f~07D.  Henderson.]  The  archaic  "i— ,  not  infrequent  in  Jeremiah,  x.  17  (K'tib);  xxii. 
23;  xlix.  16;  li.  13.  Yet  this  particular  word  occurs  only  here. — 3"^,  great,  in  the  qualitative  sense,  not  merely  multus, 
but  also  TOOj/was, poteTM,  great,  powerful,  occurs  often;  Ps.  xlviii.  3  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  1 ;  liii.  12;  Jer.  xli.  1.  See  D'HSCD  31,  et 
Sim.,  and  HB"^,  the  metropolis  of  the  Ammonites.  The  phrase  D''VJ3  2'\  occurs  only  here.  [See  Intr.,  Add.  Jiem.{l).  p.  2',»  j— 
The  3  after  ''pl^^^C/  indicates  the  object  over  which  the  Princess  rules.  See  Puerst.  [Blatney,  Boothroyd,  translate  ouer, 
instead  of  among.}— r\'^V  is  synonymous  with  713*^,  ''■S-,  DTlStO  liJ',  Gen.  xxxvii.  36  ;  xxxix.  1,  et  al.,  and  D'O'^^D  "^t^, 

TT  T-  .^__^  ...^_ 

Dan.  i.  7,  9,  et  al.  are  synonymous  with  <\^   3'^  and  <^  3"1-    The  sing.  TT^iy    e.xcepting  as  the  proper  name  Sarah,  occurs 

~  ~  T  T 

only  here.  Plural  in  Judges  v.  29;  Is.  xlix.  23;  1  Kings  xi.  3  ;  Esth.  i.  IS,  shows  that  it  is  an  old  word  and  in  earlier  times 
peculiar  lo  puctiy.   ^See  litir..  Add.  Ren.  {'Ij.  p.  29.] — PU'TO,  i"'<'uiinc€,  satrapy,  iu  sing,  occurs  only  in  books  of  Ezra  (^ii.  1  j,  A  c- 

T    •  : 
hemiah  (i.  3 ;  vii.  6 ;  xi.  3),  Ecclesiastes  (v.  7),  Daniel  (viii.  2 ;  xi.  24),  and  especially  Esther  (i.  1,  22 ;  iii.  12,  14,  etc) :  in  plu. 
in  Esth.  i.  3  ;  viii.  9 ;  ix.  3,  4,  1(1 ;   Kz-k  xix.  8 ;  1  Kings  xx.  14,  1.),  17,  19  {not  2  Kings  xx.  19,  a  mistake  of  Kuerst  copied  by 
Naegelsb.],  Eccles.  ii.  8.     Its  usi'  in  Kzrkid  and  Kinjjs  shows  that  it  was  not  unknown  in  the  time  of  Jeronii:ili.   [S,;e  lutr.. 
Add.  Iiem.{-Z).p.'M.] — [OD.    W.  Robertson,  .^ej^  to  fie6.  .Bi6.,  derives  from  ODD,  to  mslt,  dissolve,  "  a  consuming  of  strength, 

~   T 

ri'rium  d'.tsnJutio  ft  cnnfectio"  Fuerst.  from  same  verb  taken  in  a  secondary  signitication,  to  split,  divide,  separate,  similer, 
hence  metupk.  to  namhi-r,  meisure.  distribute.  The  only  evidence  of  such  a  secondary  signitication  of  the  verb  is  in  the  de- 
rivatives themselves,  QQ  and  HDO-  The  old  quaint  idea  seems  bettei'.  "QD  from  flDO,  because  it  doth  melt  and  dis- 
solve, as  it  were,  the  substance  of  those  who  are  forced  to  be  tributaries."  Gesenics  says  this  is  not  "  tolerable,"  and  derives 
from  ODD  to  number.    But  there  is  a  word  already  from  that  root,  D30,  meaning  tribute  in  the  strict  sense,  while  DO 

means  any  sort  of  tribute-service  or  hond-service  (see  crit.  notes  below),  having  a  sense  that  cannot  be  extracted  from  a  verb 
signifying  to  number. — W.  U.  II.] 

Ver.  2. — [n33n   133-    The  infinitive  construct  before  a  finite  verb  expresses  intensity,  after  it  continuity.    She  weepeth 

sire  or  sorely,  Broughton,  E.  V.,  Blayney,  Boothroyb,  Henderson,  or  bitterly,  Noyes,  not  continually,  as  old  Eng.  vers.,  Dio- 

:.vTi,  French  vers.,  Wordsworth,  and  Naegelsbach.—W.  H.  H.]—''nS  never  occurs  in  Jeremiah.  [See  Tnfr.,  Add.  Rem.  (2). 

p.  30.]-  Jeremiah  uses  the  Piel  an  J,  xvi.  7 ;  xxxi.  13 ;  but  not  the  phrase  DP  JD    TX,  occurring  in  this  chapter  four  times, 

and  elsewhere  only  in  Eccl.iv.l.  [See  7n!;r.,jldd.iZem.  (3).  p.  80.]   Jeremiah  uses  n''3nX  xx.  4,  6;  ^»1  xxix.  23  ;  v.  8;  vii.  5, 

"''•■;    1J13  iii.  8,  11,  20;  v.  11 ;  xii.  6,  ete.;  3''j<,  frequently,  vi.  25;  xv.  11 ;   xviii.'lf,  ete.— DO'i**?    VH  occurs  elsewhere 

-T  ••  .  .      .  .r 

only  in  Ps.  cxxxix.  22. 


EXEGETICAL  AND   CRITICAL. 
Ver.  1.  How,  T}D^ii.     The  second  and  fourth 

T     ■■ 

chapters  also  begin  with  this  word.  It  is  used 
by  Jeremiah  (viii.  8;  xlviii.  17),  and  not  seldom 
in  Deuteronomy  (i.  12;  vii.  17;  xii.  30;  xviii. 
21).  In  Isaiah  it  occurs  once,  i.  21,  a  passage 
which  seems  to  have  been  in  our  Poet's  mind. 
There,  as  here,  the  ideal  person  of  Jerusalem, 
i.  e.,  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem  (in  distinction  from 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  to  which  ver.  3  relates),  is  the 
subject.  The  personification  is  apparent:  1. 
From  the  expression,  .■<iis  solitary.  2.  From  the 
words,  as  a  widoiv.  The  comparison  with  a  per- 
son shows  that  the  subject  of  comparison  is  re- 
garded as  a  person.  3.  The  singular  forms  in 
ver.  2,  she  weeps,  her  tears,  her  cheeks,  etc.,  as  cer- 
tainly indicate  a  personification,  as  the  plural 
forms  would  prove  a  reference  to  the  concrete 
multitude  of  the  exiles.  The  Poet  then  has  in 
his  eye,  not,  perhaps,  the  collective  person  of  the 
exiled  people,  but  the  ideal  person  of  the  citi/  of 
Jerusalem,  now  ruined.     This  person  he  sees  in 


the  spirit,  sitting  solitary  amidst  the  devastated 
holy  places. — Doth  the  city  sit  solitary. 
Solitary,  because  she  has  lost  her  inhabitants, 
her  children.  This  is  evident  from  the  antithe- 
sis,— the  city  that  was  full  of  people.  [Notes: 
"There  are  several  Roman  coins  extant,  repre- 
senting on  the  one  side  the  emperor  Vespasian, 
and  on  the  other  a  woman  (the  daughter  of  Zion) 
sitting  upon  the  ground  under  a  palm  tree,  in  a 
mournful  attitude,  and  having  around  her  a  heap 
of  arms,  shields,  etc.  The  legend  is  Jud^a 
Capta — Judea  taken."] — That  was  full  of 
people  !  In  regard  to  sense  and  construction, 
see  Jer.  li.  13;  1  Sam.  ii.  5.  [Henderson:  "It 
is  impossible  to  determine  what  was  the  extent 
of  the  population  of  ancient  Jerusalem.  Before 
the  revolt  under  Relioboam  it  must  have  been 
very  great,  especially  during  the  celebration  of 
the  three  annual  festivals,  when  the  males  con- 
gregated there  from  all  parts  of  the  country  :  and 
even  after  that  event,  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that,  as  the  metropolis  of  the  southern  kingdom, 
the  number  of  inhabitants  was  considerable.  It 
not  only  continued  to  be  the  resort  of  the  tribes 


40 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  but  was  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal mercantile  cities  of  the  East."] — Hovr. 
[The  repetition  of  the  How  in  the  second  and  the 
last  clauses  of  the  verse,  as  in  our  English  ver- 
sion, is  not  only  unnecessary,  but  mars  the 
rhythmical  construction  and  interrupts  the  con- 
secutive flow  of  thought.  There  is  no  more  pro- 
priety in  its  repetition  in  ver.  1,  than  there  would 
be  in  ver.  2,  which  in  form  and  matter  is  a  con- 
tinuation of  ver.  1.  The  particle,  as  used  in  the 
beginning  of  the  verse,  is  ejaculatory,  not  inter- 
rogative. It  rouses  and  directs  attention,  with 
fine  poetical  effect,  to  the  image  of  the  ideal 
Jerusalem,  once  representing  a  city  fuU  ofpeoj^le, 
now  seen  as  a  dejected  woman,  sitting  solitary,  as 
in  the  deepest  grief.  The  attention  thus  gained, 
the  description  goes  on  to  the  end  of  ver.  2,  add- 
ing leature  to  feature,  and  circumstance  to  cir- 
cumstance, with  admirable  art  and  graphic 
power,  till  the  picture  is  complete. — W.  H.  H.] 
— Is  she — she  is  become  as  a  widow  !  In 
Is.  i.  21,  the  faithful  city  has  become  a  harlot. 
Here,  where  we  have  a  poem  not  of  invective  and 
denunciation,  but  of  lamentation,  the  populous 
city  has  become  as  a  widow.     For  she  is  no  longer 

(nS;;3)  a  married  one,  since  she  no  longer  enjoys 
communion  with  Jehovah,  her  Husband  (7j;3- 
See  Delitzsch  on  Isaiah  llv.  1  sqq.).  She  is  a 
wovian  forsaken  (Is.  liv.  6),  and  the  reproach  of 
widowhood  (Is.  liv.  6)  rests  upon  her.  The  ex- 
pression as  a  widow  [njD/Nip,  as  one  forsaken, 
widowed]  implies  that  Jerusalem  has  not  lost  her 
husband  utterly  and  forever,  but  she  is  only  se- 
parated from  him  for  a  period.  There  is  in  the 
particle  as  a  foreshadowing  of  reunion.  See  the 
expression  as  widoius  in  v.  3. — She  that  was 
great  among  the  nations.  [Dr.  Naegels- 
bach's  punctuation,  which  is  the  punctuation 
also  of  the  Sept.,  Vulg.,  and  some  more  modern 
versions,  requires  us  to  connect  these  words  with 
the  preceding  declaration.  She  is  become  as  a 
widotu,  the  great  one  ( Die  Grosse)  among  the  na- 
tions. This  is,  however,  in  violation  of  the  ma- 
soretic  punctuation,  and  does  not  seem  to 
strengthen  the  meaning  that  Dr.  N.  derives  from 
the  expression  as  a  widow.  See  critical  notes  be- 
low. Nor  is  there  a  necessary  antithesis  between 
being  as  a  widow  and  having  been  great  among  the 
nations.  If  we  adopt  the  punctuation  of  the  Sept. 
and  Vulg.,  we  should  adopt  the  translation  in  full 
of  one  or  the  other  of  those  versions,  both  of 
whicli  do  preserve  an  antithesis.  The  Sept. 
reads  She  is  become  as  a  widow,  i.  e.,  a  lone,  for- 
saken woman,  wAo  u-as  filled  with  nations.  The 
Vulg.  reads,  She  the  lady  of  nations  became  as  a 
widow.  The  punctuation  in  our  present  Hebrew 
Bibles,  which  is  retained  by  our  English  version, 
Brouohton,  Gattaker,  Noyes,  and  Gerlach, 
certainly  makes  the  sense  clearer  and  thethougbts 
more  copious.  The  city  sits  solitary  that  was  full 
of  people!  She  is  become  as  a  widow  !  She  that 
was  great  among  the  nations.  .  .  .  is  become  tributary. 
— W.  H.  H.]— And  princess  among  the  pro- 
vinces. Tliat  not  only  Israelilish,  but  foreign 
provinces  also,  were  at  times  governed  by  Jeru- 
salem, is  sufficieiitly  establislicd  in  history.  [See 
David's  conquests  and  sovereignty  over  the  neigh- 
boring states,  2  Sam.  viii.  1-4 ;  x.  G-19 ;  the  ex- 


tent of  Solomon's  dominions,  1  Kings  iv.  21,  24; 

2  Chron.  ix.  23,  24;  the  power  of  Judah  in  the 
reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  2  Chron.  xvii.  10,  11,  and 
in  that  of  Uzziah,  2  Chron.  xxvi.  6-8.  See  also 
Ezra  iv.  20,  "  There  have  been  mighty  kings  also 
over  Jerusalem,  which  have  ruled  over  all  coun- 
tries beyond  the  river;  and  toll,  tribute,  and 
custom,  was  paid  unto  them." — W.  H.  H.] — 
Hov7  is  she  become — is  become.  [See  remarks 
on  How  above.] — Tributary.  [-'Obliged  to 
pay  tribute-service.  This  is  the  common  mean- 
ing of  the  word."  Noyes.] 

'\'\2  n^t!'',  sitteth  solitary.     This  cannot  meai> 

TT         t:|t  ^ 

divellrth  alone.  For  the  isolated  location  of  the 
oily  could  be  no  misfortune,  since  contact  with 
liealhea  neighbors  was  forbidden  as  injurious. 
(See  Num.  xxiii.  9;  Lev.  xx.  24,  26 :  Deut.  xxxiii. 
2S  ;  Ex.  xxiii.  31-33;  Judg.  ii.,  iii.)  Nor  can 
n2^'  have  the  sense  of  situation,  place  of  location, 

T  :  It  ^  I-  J  > 

for  3^'  never  has  that  sense  in  the  Hebrew.  See 
Gesen.,  Thes.  In  Ps.  cxxii.  5  ;  cxxv.  1  ;  Zech. 
ii.  8  ;  xii.  6  ;  xiv.  10  it  has  either  the  act.ve  sig  ■ 
nification  oi  inhabiting,  or  the  passive  of  being  in- 
habited (see  Jer.  xvii.  6,  25  ;  xxx.  18  ;  1.  13,  39, 
et  al. ).  That  this  last  named  passive  signification 
does  not  suit  here  is  evident  from  the  contiadic- 
tion  involved  by  the  words  solitary  and  as  a  widow. 
We  can  only  translate  How  sits  solitary  the  city. 
[FuERST,  Lex.,  'Oiy%  to  sit,  as  an  expression  of 
being  bowed  down,  struck  down  and  forsaken, 
with  y^ah,  Is.  iii.  26;  Job  ii.  13;    ^Sy-hv,   Is. 

I     V  T  T  T     T 

xlvii.  1 ;  Tja,  Lam.  i.  1 ;  iii.  28 ;  DDWn,  Ezr.  ix. 

3  ;  njoSx,  Gen.  xxxviii.  11 ;  Is.  xlvii.  8."]  'r^S"}- 
It  is  probable  that  the  form  ^^^Jjp,  in  the  kindred 
passage.  Is.  i.  21,  influenced  the  choice  of  the 
form  of  the  word  here. — nj07XJD,  as  a  widow. 
In  antithesis  to  D^  '^3^,  full  of  people,  n>^2p. 
bereaved  of  children,  childless,  would  be  first  sug- 
gested :  but  this  word  occurs  only  once.  Is.  xlix. 

21.  ri/SB?,  also,  occurs  once  only  (in  connection 
with  njoSx),  Jer.  xviii.  21.  H^piT  is  the  bar- 
ren woman,  T\12'^'0  or  Pn^^D  is  abortum  faciens, 
Ex.  xxiii.  26;  2  Kings  ii.  19,  21,  or  infaniicida, 
Ez.  xxxvi.  13.  njoSx  suits  admirably,  in  that 
it  involves  the  impossibility  of  bearing  children 
in  the  future.  And  that  is  what  the  Poet  would 
say.  Jerusalem  is  placed  in  a  condition  in  which 
it  is  impossible  for  her  to  become  a  mother  of 
children,  Ps.  cxiii.  9.  The  other  feature,  that  she 
is  also  a  widow  robbed  of  the  children  already 
born  to  her,  is  further  brought  out  in  what  fol- 
lows. I  do  not  believe,  therefore,  that  Jerusa- 
lem is  here  called  a  widow,  because  she  is  be- 
reaved "of  king  and  princes,  and  tlie  protection 
and  guidance  of  rulers,"  as  Vitringa  and  others 
after  liim  (lately  Engelhardt),  appealing  to  Is. 
xlvii.  8,  have  been  inclined  to  think.  Besides 
that,  nj07N3  is  not  synonymous  with  'Vh,  Raschi 
has  already  remarked.  Compare  DOv  at  the 
close  of  this  verse,  and  njllb.  Is.  i.  21.  The 
word  njO^X   is  often  found  in  Jeremiah,  vii.  6  ; 


CHAP.  I.  3. 


41 


IV.  8;  xviii.  21;  xxii.  3.  [Henderson  is  too 
positive  when  he  says,  "The  3  in  nj07N3  is 
simply  that  of  comparison,  and  is  not  intended 
to  express  any  hope  that  she  would  be  restored 
from  her  widowed  state,  as  Jarchi  fancifully 
supposes."  Comparison  is  not  assertion:  a  thing 
is  not  what  it  is  compared  with.  If  2  then  does 
simply  indicate  a  comparison,  yet  it  leaves  a  pos- 
sibility, and  hence  a  hope  of  restoration  from  a 
widowed  state  ;  and  there  is  certainly  more  than 
a  '■fanciful'  distinction  between  being  a  widow, 

njohxS,  and  being  like  one,  rUD^N^.— W.  H.  H.l 

— DO?  nn^n,  has  become  tributarg.  The  expres- 
sion is  found  in  Genesis  (xlix.  15)  and  in  Deute- 
ronomy (xx.  11) ;  and  is  especially  frequent  in  1 
Kings  (v.  27,  28;  ix.  15,  21)  and  in  Judges  (i.  28, 
30,  33,  35).  It  is  also  found  in  Isaiah  (xxxi.  8). 
The  etymology  and  fundamental  meaning  are  not 
quite  certain.  At  all  the  places  cited  the  word 
Indicates  bond-service,  or   rather,   collectively, 

services  (see  ^^J?  DD,  Gen.  xlix.  15;  Josh.  xvi. 
10;  1  Kings  ix.  21).  It  first  occurs  in  the  sense 
of  trihutum,  a  nioneg  tax,  very  late,  Esth.  x.  1. 
It  is,  however,  unimportant  whether  we  take  the 
word  in  our  text  in  the  one  sense  or  the  other. 
Nor  can  we  from  this  word  determine  the  exact 
period  of  time,  as  J.  D.  Michaelis  would  do, 
when  he  says:  "Therefore  she  is  still  standing, 
but  has  become  tributary.  This  first  happened 
under  the  Egyptians  "  (he  has  here  in  mind  evi- 
dently 2  Kings  xxiii.  33).  "To  what  time  then 
is  this  to  be  referred, — to  that  of  the  elegy  on 
Josiah,  or  to  that  of  a  later  period  ?"  If  Jeru- 
ealem  was  no  longer  standing,  and  not  a  human 
30ul  dwelt  there,  yet  the  place  on  which  the  ruins 
of  Jerusalem  remained  had  become,"  with  the 
whole  land,  a  part  of  the  territory  subjected  to 
the  Chaldeans. 

Ver.  2.  She  weepeth  sore  in  the  night. 
— She  weeps  and  weeps  the  night  throughout.  [This 
translation  is  beautiful  and  expository,  but  for 
grammatical  reasons  the  E.  V.  is  to  be  preferred. 
See  the  Gramm.  Notes. — W.  H.  H.]  The  sorrowing 
widow  weeps  in  the  night.  Not  in  the  night-time 
only,  in  distinction  from  day-time, — nor,  as  Ew- 
jVLD  prefers,  'until  the  night.'  For  why  should 
ehe  not  weep  during  the  night  also  ?  Precisely 
this  is  the  meaning  of  the  poet.  She  weeps  in 
the  night,  but  not  only  a  part  of  the  night,  for 


that  were  nothing  wonderful,  but  so  that  her 
weeping  fills  up  the  time  which  is  usually  spent 

otherwise.     So   is   H /w3   to   be  understood  in 

T     -    - 

Num.  xiv.  1,  "and  the  people  wept  that  night." 
See  Jer.  vi.  5;  xxxvi.  30,  et  al.  [Henderson: 
"  To  express  the  more  aggravated  character  of 
the  weeping,  it  is  represented  as  indulged  in 
even  during  the  night — the  period  of  rest  and 
quiet."] — And  her  tears  are  on  her  cheeks. 
'Tears,'  Jer.  viii.23;  ix.  17,  et  al.  The  absence 
of  a  predicate  index,  which  renders  the  supple- 
ment of  the  copula  'are'  necessary,  gives  the 
idea  evidently  that  the  tears  on  her  cheeks  are 
constantly  there,  have  fixed  there,  as  it  were, 
their  permanent  place.  [Henry:  "Nothing 
dries  away  sooner  than  a  tear,  -yet  fresh  griefs 
extort  fresh  tears,  so  that  her  cheeks  are  never 
free  from  them."] — Among  all  her  lovers  she 
hath  none  to  comfort  her. — She  has  no  com- 
forter.— [That  this  phrase  has  an  important 
meaning  is  to  be  inferred  by  its  recurrence  four 
times  in  this  chapter  (vers.  ii.  9-;  xvii.  21;  see 
also  ver.  16),  and  from  its  being  an  unusual  form, 
occurring  elsewhere  only  in  Eccl.  iv.  1.  It  can 
have  no  common-place  meaning.  It  refers  indi- 
rectly to  the  loss  of  the  Comforter — their  God. — 
W.  H.  H.] — All  her  friends  have  dealt  trea- 
cherously v/ith  her,  they  are  become  her 
enemies.  The  words  lovers  a,nd  friends  indicate 
the  human  supports  on  which  Jerusalem  fool- 
ishly and  presumptuously  believed  she  could 
rely,  especially  all  those  nations  whose  friend- 
ship she  had  so  often  preferred,  instead  of  trust- 
ing in  Jehovah.  See  ver.  19;  Jer.  ii.  13,  18,  33, 
36,  37;  xxii.  20,22;  Hos.  ii.  7  sqq.;  Ezek.  xxiii. 
These  places  show,  in  harmony  with  history, 
that  the  nations  toward  which  Israel  felt  itself 
drawn  in  amorous  love,  but  by  which  at  last  they 
were  not  only  deserted,  but  treated  with  even  po- 
sitive hostility,  were  especially  Assyria,  Babylon 
and  Egypt.  With  reference  to  Egypt,  see  parti- 
cularly Ezek.  xxix.  6,  7,  16.  See  Ewald  in  loc. 
[Henderson  :  "The^uers  2in&  friends  were  those 
neighboring  states  which  were  allies  of  the  He- 
brews,— and  their  idol-gods,  which  they  wor- 
shipped, and  in  which  they  trusted.  Egypt 
especially  was  the  object  of  their  confidence,  but 
not  even  she  durst  venture  to  come  to  their  help 
against  the  Chaldeans.  Those  in  the  more  im- 
mediate vicinity  actually  joined  the  northern 
enemy  on  his  irruption  into  the  country.  2 
Kings  xxiv.  2."] 


I.  3. 

3  Judah  is  gone  into  captivity,  because  of  affliction,  and  because  of  great  servi- 
tude ;  she  dwelleth  among  the  heathen,  she  findeth  no  rest :  all  her  persecutors 
overtook  her  between  the  straits. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  3.— nr\7J,  see  Jer.  i.  3.— 'jn,  found  in  Lam.  i.  3,  7,  9 ;  iii.  1, 19,  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah  ;  yet  Isaiah  uses  it 
T  :|T  •  t: 

xlviii.  10  :  occurs  also  in  Pentateuch  ;  Gen.  xvi.  11 ;  xxix.  .32  ;  xxxi.  42  ;  Ex.  iii.  7  ;  Deut.  xvi.  3  ;  xxvi.  7,  etc.;  in  Psalms  ix. 
14 ;  XXV.  18  ;  xxxi.  8,  and  in  otlier  writings  of  earlier  origin  than  Lam.— ^h:^  is  found  in  la.  vii.  22 ;  xxiv.  22  ;  Nali.  iii.  4, 

et  al.:  Jeremiah  says  ^i^X.  xxx.  14,  15,  or  313,  xiii.  22.— mi^'  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah,  yet  frequently  in  Penta- 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEllEMIAil. 


teuch,  and  in  Is.  xiv.  3 ;    xxxii.  17  ;    xxviii.  21.— nUO  occurs  Gen.  viii.  9  ;    Deut.  xxviii.  65  ;    Is.  xxxir.  14,  is  not  useill.y 
Jeremiah :  he  uses  nn^ JO,  xlv.  3.  [See  Inir.  AM.  R.  (4).  p.  30.  (6). \t.  31.^— Jtyj  occurs  in  Jct.  xlii.  16 (see  also  xxxix.  5 ;  lii.  8;.J 

T  ~  T 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  3.  The  tribe  of  Judah  is  the  subject  here, 
as  the  city  of  Jerusalem  was  in  vers.  1,  2,  and  is 
conceived  of  similarly  as  an  ideal  person. — 
Judah  is  gone  into  captivity,  because  of 
affliction  and  because  of  great  servitude. 
Iiito  exile  is  Judah  gone  from  oppression  and  severe 
servitude.  It  has  been  correctly  remarked  that 
from  oppression  and  from  hard  servitude  cannot  re- 
fer to  the  involuntary  exile  of  Judah,  since  it  is 
added  she  findeth  no  rest.  For  who  may  expect 
rest  for  a  people  carried  into  captivity  ?  But 
voluntary  fugitives  might  hope  to  find  rest.  Of 
Buch  voluntary  exiles,  Jeremiah  speaks  in  xl.  11, 
12,  and  from  Jer.  xliii.  4-7  we  learn  that  all  these 
finally  agreed  together  to  seek  rest  in  Egypt. 
Th.at  they  found  710  rest  there  exactly  agrees  with 
what  the  prophet  had  declared,  xlii.  13-22,  to  the 
people  stubbornly  persisting  in  the  flight  to 
Egypt.  When  the  Poet  speaks  here  of  Judah  as 
a  fugitive,  seeking  rest  and  finding  none,  the 
reason  for  his  doing  so  may  be  surmised  from  the 
fact  that  he  himself  belonged  to  that  part  of  the 
people  that  were  living  in  exile.  We  may  sup- 
pose, also,  that  he  regarded  this  part  of  the  na- 
tion as  a  representative  of  the  whole  nation,  be- 
cause they  consisted  of  people  who  were  at  least 
free.  It  is  much  like  saying, — Judah  isno  longer 
with  those  who  have  become  mixed  with  a  foreign 
people  as  slaves.  If  it  yet  survive,  it  survives  in 
a  voluntary  exile,  where,  notwithstanding  its 
distressed  state  and  reduced  numbers,  it  still  re- 
tains at  least  its  personal  liberty.  [Blayney: 
"Our  translators,  who  have  rendered,  Judah  is 
gone  into  captivity  because  of  affliction 
and  because  of  great  servitude,  seem  to 
have  adopted  the  notion  of  the  Chaldee  Para- 
phrast,  who  represents  the  Jews  to  have  been 
carried  into  captivity  in  retaliation  of  their  having 
oppressed  the  widow  and  the  fatherless  among 
them,  and  prolonged  illegally  the  bondage  of 
their  brethren  who  had  been  sold  them  for 
slaves."  Henderson  adopts  this  view,  that  Ju- 
dah is  here  represented  as  suffering  captivity  on 
account  of,  or  because  of  her  oppressing  and 
cruelly  enslaving  her  own  people,  see  Jer.  xxxiv. 
But  the  other  view,  that  Judah  sought  by  volun- 
tary exile  to  escape  the  oppression  and  enslave- 
ment of  the  Chaldeans,  is  recommended  by  the 
reasons  given  above,  and  is  adopted  by  Blaynby, 


C.  B.  and  J.  D.   Michaelis,   Boothroyd   and 

NoYES.       HouBiGANT,    quoted    approvingly    by 

Boothroyd  in  his  Ifeb.  Bib.,  connects  the  words 

"from  oppression  and  hard  servitude"  with  the 

words    "she  findeth   no  rest,"  an  obvious    and 

awkward  attempt  to  escape  the  difficulty  of  the 

supposed  causal  sense  of  J'D.     Hugh  Broughton 

translates  Judah  leaveth  country  after  affliction  and 

much    bondage. — W.   H.  H.] — [She     dwelleth 

among   the   heathen,   lit.,    nations,   i.  e.,  the 

heathen  nations.     The  word  diuell  conveys  an  idea 

of  a  settled  permanent  abode,  not  required  by 

the  Hebrew,   T\2^\     The  German,  sitzet,  which 
'        T :  IT  '  ' 

N AEGEL8BACH  uses,  is  better  (see  ver.  1 ).  The  fu- 
gitive, fleeing  before  her  pursuers,  finds  at  last  a 
place  among  the  heathen,  where  she  sits  down  in 
hoped-for  security  :  but  in  vain  ;  her  pursuers 
overtake  her,  as  the  hart  is  found  by  the  hunter, 
in  the  straits  or  defiles  of  the  mountain,  from 
which  there  is  no  escape.  See  ver.  6,  theg  flee  like 
harts  before  the  pursuer. — W.  H.  H.] — She  find- 
eth no  rest:  all  her  persecutors,  pursuers, 
in  antithesis  to  all  her  lovers  and  all  her  friends  in 
ver.  2  (see  i.  6;  iv.  19;  Jer.  xv.  15;  xvii.  18  ;  xx. 
11)  overtook  her  between  the  straits. 
D'^Jfip  (Sing,  "llfp)  occurs,  besides  here,  only  Ps. 
cxvi.  3  ;  cxviii.  6.  It  can  mean  neither  i?A//3ov- 
Tec  (so  Sept.,  which  erroneously  takes  it  for  a 
participle),  nor  termini,  dpia/uol  (so  Chald.,  Veni- 
lian  Greek,  et  al.).  It  means  anguslise,  narrow 
defiles  from  which  there  is  no  outlet.  The  figure 
is  taken  from  the  chase.  See  the  German  phrase, 
"m  die  Engen  treiben,"  "to  drive  one  into 
straits."  [W.Robertson:  "IXD,  a  streight,  or 
a  streightiiig  distress."  Fuerst:  "to  take  one 
in  the  straits,  i.  e.,  to  get  one  at  last  into  our 
power,  a  proverbial  phrase."  The  present  use 
of  the  English  word  straits  (as  'reduced  to 
straits,'  'in  great  straits')  explains  the  sense 
here,  but  does  not  justify  the  translation,  overtook 
her  between  the  straits. — W.  II.  H.]  The  fugitive 
Judah  sits  indeed  in  the  midst  of  a  heathenish 
people,  but  has  found  there  no  rest.  She  would 
flee  still  further,  were  it  possible.  But  whither 
could  the  Jews,  with  their  wives,  their  children, 
and  all  their  goods,  have  fled  beyond  the  desert- 
surrounded  Egypt?  They  dwelt  there,  it  is  true, 
but  they  dwelt  amidst  straits.  All  their  pursuers 
(and  that  there  were  enough  of  them  in  Egypt, 
old  and  new,  is  evident  from  Jer.  xliv.  12,  18, 
26  sqq.)  could  reach  them  there. 


I.  4-6. 

The  ways  of  Zion  do  mourn,  because  none  come  to  the  solemn  feasts :  all  her 
gates  are  desolate ;  her  priests  sigh,  her  virgins  are  afflicted,  and  she  is  in  bitter- 
ness. Her  adversaries  are  the  chief,  her  enemies  prosper ;  for  the  Lord  hath  af- 
flicted her  for  the  multitude  of  her  transgressions :  her  children  are  gone  into  cap- 
tivity before  the  enemy.  And  from  the  daughter  of  Zion  all  her  beauty  is  de- 
parted :  her  princes  are  become  like  harts  that  find  no  pasture ;  and  they  are  gone 
without  strength  before  the  pursuer. 


CHAP.  I.  4-6. 


4S 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
Ver.  4. — 73X.  adj.  morumfvH  [not  desert,  waste,  devastated,  as  Fuerst  says,  which  destroys  the  beautiful  personificati  n 
— W.  H.  H.],  occurs  Gen.  xxxvii.  35  ;  Is.  Ivii.  18,  et  ah,  never  in  Jeremiah.  The  verb  73X  he  uses,  in  the  same  sense  as  tin- 
adjective  here  (iv.  28;  xii.  4, 11 ;  xiv.  2;  xxiii.  10)  [and  also  the  noun  72X,  vi.  26,  et  al. — W.  H.  H.]  Isaiah  uses  the  adj.c 
tive,  Ivii.  18 ;  Ixi.  23. — '  73Di  see  Jer.  ii.  15 ;  ix.  10,  11. — The  expression  'X3  (see  Gen.  xxiii.  10, 18)  is  not  found  in  Jeremiali. 
— ^^10  is  found  in  Jeremiah  twice,  viii.  7;  xlvi.  17,  both  times  in  the  sense  of  tempus  Jixuin.    In  the  Lamentations  the 

word  occurs  six  times,  and  always  in  the  sense  of  a  time  of  feast,  a  festival,  i.  4,  1." ;  ii.  G,  7,  22,  or  t'lr  phu-f  of  a  feast,  v.  (>. 
[It  may  have  here  tlie  sense  of  an  appointed  time.  Ordinary  services  in  the  Temple  are  neglected.  None  flock  to  Zion  at  i.it; 
usual  times  of  service. — W.  H.  H.] — The  part.  DOIty  is  not  in  Jeremiah  :  he  uses  the  part.  Niph.,  xxxiii.  10,  and  D0i2^,  -Nii- 
11.  The  plur.  ending  V —  (see  iv.  3,  K'tib),  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah. — The  root  njN  Jeremiah  docs  not  use,  either  in  a 
verbal  or  a  substantive  form  (see  Lam.  i.  8, 11,  21). — HIJIJ,  see  HJin  below. — TO  Jeremiah  does  use,  ii.  19;  iv.  18. 

Ver.  5. — As  shown  above,  U?K"1 7   VH  is  a  Deuteronomic,  y'ltfj  a  Jeremiac  expression.   For  grammatical  form  of  latter, 
:         T  T 

see  Olsh.,  §233,  6.     T\1^T\  never  occurs  in  Jeremiah,  but  frequently  in  Lamentations,  i.  4,  12  ;  iii.  32,  33:  elsewhere.  Is.  Ii. 

T 

23;  Zeph.  iii.  18.     [Vulgate  derives  it  from   rUH,  which  sometimes  means  to  speak ;  quia  Dominus  locutus  est  super  earn ; 

T  T 

DouAY,  because  the  Lord  hath  spoki-n  against  her.  But  Sept.,  Syr.  and  Versions  generally  derive  it  from  HJ'— W.  11.  II.] — 
3"l-7_y  is  entirely  Jeremiac  (see  on  H'lp,  ver.  S).—^\^p  in  Jeremiah  only  once,  v.  6. — 771^,',  Jer.  xliv.  7  ;  SSu',  Jer. 
vi.  11  ;  ix.  20. — '311?  ^/H  is  peculiar  to  this  place.  '3^  cannot  well  be  an  accusative,  since  to  go  into  exile  is  always  else- 
where  expressed  by  ^21^3  ^771,  see  ver.  18.  [Henderson:  her  children  are  gone  captives  before  the  enemy.] — The  sing. 
iy,  which  is  frequent  in  Lam.  (i.  7,  10;  ii.  4;  iv.  12),  never  occurs  in  Jeremiah  :  he  uses  only  the  plural  (xxx.  16  ;  xlvi.  lOj 
and  niy  (iv  31  ;  vi.  24,  et  al.). 

Ver.  6. — 10  Ni*\  for  forsaken,  lost,  is  peculiar.  [Henderson  :  "For  r\3~fD  the  K'ri  and  some  MSS.  read  more  cor- 
rectly n3D-  The  phrase  is  also  thus  quoted  in  the  Rabboth."  This  best  suits  the  rhythm. — ^Y.  II.  II.] — TTH  is  never 
found  in  Jeremiah  ;  nor  7''X  (yet  see  TlS'X,  xiv.  5) ;   nor  D^^O  (Jeremiah  always  says  J^'J^ID,  x.  21 :  xxiii.  1 ;  xxv.  36). 

We  find  exprtssions  in  Jeremiah  analogous  to  niJ  K73,  ii-  H,  /'J^V  H/S,  v.  7,  D''n'7X  x'73-— 'ITT  is  found  in  Jere- 
miah, but  only  with  suffixes,  xv.  15 ;  xvii.  18 ;  xx.  11. 


EXEGETICAL    AND    CRITICAL. 

These  verses  contain  a  description  of  the  pre- 
sent condition  of  the  city  and  people  of  Jerusa- 
lem [or,  a  new  aspect  of  their  condition  is  pre- 
sented.— We  have  here  another  of  those  changes 
which  impart  to  these  poems  a  highly  dramatic 
character.  A  third  personage  is  introduced, — 
"  the  daughter  of  Zion."  The  ideal  person  here 
is  not  that  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  formerly  in 
outward  splendor  and  estate  a  queen  among  the 
nations,  now  fallen  and  humbled  (vers.  1,  2),  nor 
yet  that  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  or  of  the  theocra- 
tic people,  now  a  fugitive  among  the  heathen  (ver. 
3), — but  of  Zion,  formerly  the  seat  of  the  theo- 
cracy, the  abode  of  God,  the  Temple  where  Judali 
and  Jerusalem  worshipped,  now  forsaken  and 
despoiled.  No  longer  do  the  people  gather  to 
her  appointed  solemnities.  Silence  reigns  on 
Zion,  broken  only  by  the  sobs  of  her  priests  and 
the  moaning  of  her  virgins,  a  higher  evidence 
than  either  the  ruined  city  or  the  exiled  people, 
that  the  glory  was  departed  from  Israel. — 
W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  4.  The  ways  of  Zion,  The  ivny  to  Zion, 
those  ways  which  lead  to  Zion:  not  the  streets 
of  the  city,  as  Rosenmueller  thinks,  for  the  lat- 
ter are  called  mvin  (see  Hos.  vii.  1  with  vi.  9), 
do  mourn,  are  mournful  (Prosopopoeia,  as,  e.g., 
ii.  19;  Jer.  xiv.  2;  xxiii.  10;  Am.  i.  2),  because 
none  come  to  the  solemn  feasts,  forsaken 
by  those  who  used  to  come  to  her  feasts  [fjecause  there 
are  none  coming  to  her  appointed  services.  Appointed 
assemblies,  including  all  occasions  of  stated  wor- 
Kliip,  whether  daily  sacrifices  or  annual  festivals, 
would  more  correctly  interpret  the  sense  than 


either  "feasts,"  "  solemn  feasts,"  or  "festivals." 
— W.  H.  H.] — All  her  gates  are  desolate,  de- 
stroyed. Concerning  the  city  itself,  its  gates  are 
destroyed.  But  ruined  gates  are  the  sign  of  a 
ruined  city.  ["Destroyed,"  so  N.\egei,sbach, 
zerstiJrt,  Sept.  7'j<pai'tapi:vai=r:xze<l  to  the  gi'ound, 
Vulg.  deslructse.  E.  V.  and  modern  Versions  ge- 
nerally read  desolate.  It  is  the  gates  of  Zion, 
not  the  gates  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  that  are 
here  referred  to.  Those  sacred  barriers  are  re- 
moved. The  holy  place  has  lost  its  sanctity.  It 
is  open  now  to  the  intrusion  of  any  who  please  to 
enter.  See  ver.  10:  "  She  hath  seen  that  the  heathen 
entered  itifo  her  sanctuary  -whom  Thou  didst  comiaand 
that  they  should  not  enter  into  Thy  congregation.'''' 
What  could  more  forcibly  express,  in  accordance 
with  Jewish  ideas,  the  idea  that  the  theocratic 
glory  had  departed  from  Israel? — W.  H.  H.] — 
Her  priests  sigh:  her  virgins  are  afflicted, 
sorrouful.  Two  classes  of  the  inhabitants  are 
named. — the  priests  and  the  virgins:  the  former 
the  nobility,  the  latter  the  flower  and  ornament 
of  the  nation.  Tlie  former  sigh  under  heavy  op- 
pression ;  the  latter,  who  formerly  rendered 
every  festival  attractive,  with  dances  and  pas- 
times (see  Jer.  xxxi.  13;  Herz.  Real.  Encyc, 
XV.,  pp.  414,  415),  are  now  sorrowful.  It  is 
thus  intimated  that  every  possibility  of  making 
a  joyous  festival  is  gone.  See  Jer.  vii.  34;  xvi. 
9;  xxv.  10;  xxxiii.  11;  comp.  xxx.  19.  The 
Sept.  reads,  instead  of  sorrouful,  ayauFvai^led 
away;  the  translation  evidently  of  nU^np,  which 
either  really  stood  in  the  text,  or  was  erroneously 
substituted  by  the  Alexandrian  for  the  I'are  word 
r>U=!J.  Ew.^LD  follows  the  Sept.  Incorrectly,  it 
seems  to  me.  iTUIJ  is  sufficiently  expressive,  if  it 
be  taken  as  an  indication  of  the  prevailing  grief 


44 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


and  in  antithesis  to  the  indications  of  the  public 
rejoicings  that  existed  in  former  times.  [The 
mention  of  "the  priests"  particularly  shows 
that  the  sacred  precincts  of  Zion,  where  they 
ministered,  and  where  "  the  virgins  "  went  up  to 
the  solemn  feasts  with  joy  and  gladness,  are  be- 
fore the  Poet's  eye.  To  say  that  the  priests  are 
mentioned  because  they  constituted  "the  nobi- 
lity" of  the  inhabitants  of  the  city,  is  not  only 
awkward,  but  untrue.  Notes  translates  the  last 
clause  Her  virgins  ivail:  a  meaning  of  the  origi- 
nal word  not  licensed  by  authority. — W.  H.  H.] 
— And  she  is  in  bitterness.  In  these  words 
the  whole  is  summed  up.  [It  is,  perhaps,  impos- 
sible to  give  in  English  the  exquisite  force  of  the 
original.  Naegelsbach  nearly  reproduces  it  in 
German,  ''Undihr — ist  wehe." — W.  H.  H.]  Here 
it  is  evident  that  the  ideal  person  of  Zion  is  the 
embodiment  of  all  the  particular  members  and 
ranks  of  the  community  (des  volkslebcns).  [If 
this  were  indisputably  evident,  it  would  not  mi- 
litate with  the  fact  that  Zion  represented  the  re- 
ligious life  as  Judah  did  the  political  life  of  the 
people. — W.  H.  H.] — This  relative  conclusion 
shows  that  the  Poet  proposes  to  pass  to  something 
new.  In  fact,  ver.  4  describes  the  positive  sor- 
rows and  afflictions  of  the  people :  ver.  5,  a.  b., 
the  good  fortune  of  her  enemies  as  the  natural 
reciprocal  effect  of  the  misfortunes  of  Judah ; 
vers.  5,  c,  6,  the  negative  side  of  the  painful 
experience  of  the  people,  namely,  the  losses  they 
sustained. 

Ver.  5.  Her  adversaries  are  the  chief, 
lit.,  have  become  the  head  [/.  e.,  her  superiors. 
Blayney  and  Noyes  :  or,  the  head  over  her. 
BooTHROYD.]  In  Deut.  xxviii.  13  a  promise  is 
made  to  Israel,  if  obedient,  "and  the  Lord  shall 
make  thee  the  head  and  not  the  tail,"  and  in 
same  chapter,  ver.  44,  the  reverse  is  threat- 
ened, if  disobedient.  The  Poet,  without  doubt, 
had  these  passages  in  his  mind. — Her  enemies 
prosper.  The  darkness  of  Israel's  sorrows  is 
deepened  by  the  brilliant  prosperity  of  her  ene- 
mies. The  expr?s.sion  occurs  in  same  sense,  Jer. 
xii.  1.  See  Ps.  cxxii.  6  ;  Job  xii.  6.— For  the 
LORD  hath  afflicted  her  for  the  multitude 
of  her  transgressions.  This  advantage  on  the 
part  of  their  enemies  had  not  happened  by 
chance,  nor  by  mere  arbitrariness  or  unrighteous- 
ness on  the  side  of  God,  but  by  an  act  of  Divine 
rectitude  in  the  punishment  of  Israel  for  their 
sins.  What  is  professedly  made  conspicuous  in 
ver.  8  is  here  anticipated.  [Observe,  in  con- 
nection with  Zion,  as  the  representative  of  the 
religious  element  of  the  theocratic  idea,  in  dis- 
tinction from  the  national,  the  name  Jehovah  is 
first  introduced,  and  the  calamities  suffered  by 
the  people  are  first  distinctly  ascribed  to  tlieir 
sins; — the  sins  especially  of  priests  and  ministers 
of  religion,  and  of  hypocrisy,  formalism  and 
idolatry  on  the  part  of  liie  people. — W.  H.  II.] — 
Her  children  are  gone  into  captivity,  her 
youni/  children  are  (joiie  caplives.  Froni  here  to 
end  of  ver.  6  the  Poet  describes  what  Judah  has 

lost.  And  first,  her  children.  D'SVi;^  are  little 
children  (see  ii.  20;  iv.  4;  Jer.  vi.  11;  ix.  20). 
ThcM!  are  compelled  as  captives  to  go  forth  be- 
fore the  oppressor  into  fori'ign  lands.  See  Joel 
iv.  2,  6. — Before  the  enemy.      [The  word  ad- 


versary (so  Broughton)  is  preferred  to  enemy, 
E.  v.,  because  the  word  in  Hebrew  is  the  same 
as  that  rendered  "adversaries"  in  the  first 
clause.  Oppressor  and  oppressors  might  be  well 
substituted. — W.  H.  H.]  What  renders  this  more 
dreadful  is  the  idea  that  the  little  children  are 
torn  away  from  parents  and  brothers  and  sisters, 
to  be  driven  as  merchandise  by  their  purchasers, 
some  to  one  place  and  some  to  another.  [Hen- 
derson :  "In  the  representations  which  we  find 
on  ancient  sculptures  nolliing  is  more  affecting 
tiian  to  observe  females  and  young  children 
driven  as  captives  before  their  conquerors."  Ob- 
serve, young  childron  are  mentioned  in  connection 
with  Zion  because  they,  in  a  peculiar  sense,  are 
the  care  of  the  church,  of  the  religious  rather 
than  the  political  rulers,  the  lambs  of  the  flock 
entrusted  to  the  spiritual  shepherds  of  Israel. 
Nothing  could  more  forcibly  express,  in  accord- 
ance with  Jewish  ideas,  the  fact  that  God  had 
forsaken  His  people,  than  that  the  heathen  were 
suffered,  without  Divine  hindrance,  to  carry  away 
\.\\QSQyoung  children,  the  children  of  the  covenant, 
into  captivity  and  slavery.  It  is  this  thought  that 
constitutes  the  poetic  climax,  showing  how  se- 
verely Jehovah  afiiicted  Zion  for  her  sins. — 
W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  6.  And  from  the  daughter  of  Zion 
all  her  beauty  is  departed.  Zion  has  lost, 
not  only  her  dearest  and  most  precious  ones,  her 
children,  but  also  her  beauty,  her  glory.  This  last 
feature  is  represented  hy  the pri7ices,  with  whom, 
and  before  them  all,  the  king  is  to  be  classed. 
[What  then  was  the  beauty  oi  Zion — the  King  and 
the  Princes,  or  God  Himself?  The  beauty  of  Zion 
was  the  presence  of  Jehovah  and  the  maintenance 
of  His  worship  on  the  Holy  Mount.    See  Lam.  ii. 

1,  6;    1  Sam.  iv.  21,  22  ;    Ezek.  vii.  20-22  ;  Ps.  1. 

2,  "Out  of  Zion,  the  perfection  of  beauty,  God 
hath  shined,"  Ps.  xcvi.  9,  "Oh,  worship  the  Lord 

in  the  beauty  of  holiness,"  tyip-r\'2")n3,  Ps. 
cxxxii.  13,  14.  The  beauty  of  Zion  departed 
when  God  forsook  His  people,  suffered  the  Tem- 
ple to  be  destroyed,  Jer.  lii.  13,  and  the  ordi- 
nances of  worship  to  be  discontinued.  The  con- 
dition of  her  princes,  like  hunted  harts,  pursued 
and  overtaken,  is  the  consequence  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  Zion,  whence  they  are  driven  forth,  de- 
prived of  all  spiritual  nourishment.  God  is  no 
longer  with  them.  No  more  are  they  fed  with 
the  bread  of  Heaven;  and  therefore,  like  starved 
and  parched  harts,  they  fall  an  easy  prey  to 
their  pursuers. — W.  H.  H.] — Her  princes  are 
become  like  harts  that  find  no  pasture ; 
and  they  are  gone  w^ithout  strength  be- 
fore the  enemy.  These  noble  and  fleet-footed 
animals  lose,  by  hunger,  their  strength  and  the 
power  of  flight.  They  are  caught  and  driven  at 
pleasure.  So  the  princes  of  Zion,  formerly  her 
pride  and  strength,  are  driven  forth  by  the  pur- 
suer.    The  Sept.  and  Jerome  have  Kpcoi,  arietes, 

— rams.  They  read  or  understood  D'/ i^.  But 
evidently  /"X  is  the  stag  or  hart  (see  Deut.  xii. 
l.'j ;  xiv.  5  ;  XV.  22) :  rams  would  not  suit  in  this 
connection,  since  rams  do  not  belong  to  tliose 
animals  of  the  chase,  which  only  suffer  themselves 
to  be  taken  by  men,  when  hunger  deprives  them 
of  power  to  escape. 


CHAP.  I.  7. 


45 


I.  7. 

7  Jerusalem  remembered  in  the  days  of  her  affliction,  and  of  her  miseries,  all  her 
pleasant  things  that  she  had  in  the  days  of  old,  when  her  people  fell  into  the  hand 
of  the  enemy,  and  none  did  help  her :  the  adversaries  saw  her,  and  did  mock  at 
her  sabbaths. 


TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  7.— d    rT'Ji'    'D'   is  not  the  object  of   r\'\D'-  but  indicates  the  time,  as  is  evident  from  the  absence  of  1  befor* 
I    .  t:  T        ••  :  T  :  |T 

73.  The  accusative  ■'D'' answers,  as  frequently,  the  question,  When?  See  my  (?r.,  § 70,  (Z.  [Blatney  :  "  Houbiqant  sup- 
poses that  we  ought  to  read  'O'^  for  'D'' :  but  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  it  is  not  the  3,  but  the  D,  which  h.as  been  sunk 
before  '0%  by  means  of  the  preceding  word  having  been  terminated  with  the  same  letter,— a  mistake  of  whicli  we  find  num- 
berless instances  originating  from  the  same  cause.    '0^0  signifies  during  the  days,  or  since  they  began,  as  DTp   'O'o  does 

presently  after,  m  or  dwrrng'/ormer  days."  Boothrotb  quotes  this  note  witli  approv.al  in  his  Hebrew  Bible.  Hexdekson 
says,  "in  "'0''  there  is  an  ellipsis  of  3,  of  which  there  are  numerous  examples."     But  uouns  may  be  "  used  absolutely  to 

express  the  relations  of  time,"  see  Green's  Gr.,  §274,  2.— W.  H.  H.]— D''n:|1r3,  not  from  Tim,  but  from  TTl,  dissipari,  va- 

gari  (Hos.  xii.  1 ;  Jer.  ii.  31),  is  vagatio,  erratio,  vita  extorris  et  erratica  ("FrERST).  The  word  is  found,  besides  here  and  iii 
19,  only  at  Is.  Iviii.  7.     [Dr  J.  A.  Alexander  translates  D^nO    D" J>M,  the  afflicted,  the  homeless,  and  remarks,  "  Lowth's 

version— <7ie  wandering  poor— ia  now  commonly  regarded  as  substantially  correct.  DH^IO  is  properly  an  abstract,  mean- 
ing wandering  (from  l^T),  here  used  for  the  concrete  ivanderers."  Accepting  the  opinion  of  Lowth  and  Alexantier,  I  have 
put  "  wanderings  "  in  the  text.  Fuerst,  in  his  concordance,  <lf  rives  tlic  wcinl  t'rn'ii  '\i,  A,  as  abDVO,  but,  in  his  Lexicon,  from 
TIO,  and  translates  it  expulsion, persecution,  misery.    W.  Robertson  says,  "  ^^^"13,  her  mouraings,\iev  lamentations,  her 

miseries  or  calamities,  or  her  rebellions,  for  the  word  may  be  referred  to  the  root  i:)~l,  in  Hiph.,  to  mourn,  to  lament ;  or  to 
the  root  1"10,  to  rebel."     Blayney  says  it  "comes  from  TT,  to  descend  from  a  higher  to  a  lower  condition,"  and  so'trans- 

~T  -T 

lates  it  abatement.  The  variety  of  meanings  put  upon  the  word  is  indicated  in  the  following  English  Versions :  BroucxHTOn 
vexation ;  Blayney,  ab.isement ;  Boothroyd,  misery ;  Henderson,  persecution ;  Noyes,  oppression.  But  wanderings  is  evidently 
best  supported  by  its  use  and  most  natural  derivation,  and  suits  the  meaning  here,  but  iu  iii.  19  it  seems  to  denote  simply  a 

condition  of  wretchedness.— W.  H.  H.]— rf^pnOj  only  here  and  ver.  11,  K'tib.    Neither  lOTTD,  nor  ibnO,  found  in 

Jeremiah.     He  uses  only  mon  (iii.  19  ;   xii'.  li);    xxv.  34).— Qnp   'lO'O,  in  Jeremiah  we  have  DTp^'O'D,  xlvi.  26.— 

T'3  could  be  into  the  hand  [E.  V.,  Blayney,  Boothroyd,  Henderson,  Noyes]  instead  of  by  [Broughton]  ;  the  difference  is 

not  important.— [Blayney  :  "Instead  of  D'lX   HIXI  I  propose  to  read  D'^iTI   IX"!-"    An  ingenious,  but  unnecessary 

■T     T  T  •    •  T|-  T  "" 

unauthorized  change. — W.  H.  H.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Ver.  7.  Jerusalem.  [Here  occurs  another 
of  those  sudden  changes  which  give  to  this  poem 
its  highly  dramatic  character.  In  the  preceding 
verses,  which  may  be  properly  regarded  as  in- 
troductory to  all  that  follows,  the  citi/,  the  nation, 
and  the  church  have  been  successively  introduced. 
Now  Jerusalem  is  named  for  the  first  time.  Jeru- 
lalem,  here,  must  be  regarded  as  generic  and 
comprehensive;  the  representative  of  the  theo- 
cratic idea ;  the  head  of  all  the  cities  of  Israel, 
the  type  of  its  nationality,  lue  seat  of  its  wor- 
ship, where  God  dwelt  in  its  consecrated  Zion. 
The  ideal  persons  who  have  already  appeared. — 
the  ruined  city,  pictured  as  a  sorrowing  widow 
and  dethroned  and  conquered  queen,  of  vers.  1, 
2, — the  exile,  fleeing  from  misery  and  bondage, 
seeking  a  home  among  heathen,  but  finding  no 
rest,  no  escape  from  trouble  and  persecution,  of 
ver.  3, — the  daughter  of  Zion,  despoiled  of  her 
beauty,  bewailing  the  absence  of  worshippers, 
the  invasion  of  her  sacred  courts  by  heathen,  the 
captivity  of  her  infant  children  and  the  humi- 
liation of  her  proud  leaders  and  princes,  of  ver.s. 
4-6, — all  now  are  embraced  under  the  generic 
name  of  Jerusalem,  which  from  this  verse  to 
the  end  of  the  chapter  is  personified  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  theocratic  idea. — W.  H.  H.]  — 
remembered,  remembers.  The  unfortunate  can- 
not forbear  recalling  their  former  prosperity, 
the  remembrance  of  which  serves  both  to  com- 


I  fort  them  and  to  increase  their  sorrow.     Zion 
I  follows  this  propensity  of  nature. — in  the  days 
of  her  affliction  and  of  her  miseries,  all 
her  pleasant  things. — All  the  glorious  things, 
of  a  spiritual  and  of  a  temporal  nature,  which 
had  fallen  to  the  lot  of  the  chosen  people  from 
the  beginning  of  their  history,  are  now  the  sub- 
ject   of  painful  remembrance. — that  she  had 
in  the  days  of  old.     See  ii.  17 ;   Is.  xxiii.  7 ; 
xxxvii.  26;    Mich.  vii.  20.      [Broughton:   "in 
the   old   time."      Henderson:     "from   ancient 
days."]     EwALD  regards  the  words,  all  the  plea- 
sant things  she  had  from  the  dags  of  old,  as  erro- 
neously transplanted  here  out  of  ver.  10.     His 
principal  reason  seems  to  be  that  they  spoil  the 
rhythm.     Vaihinger  supposes  that  this  verse,  as 
well  as  ii.  19,  contains  four  members.     I  see  no 
necessity  for  this.     We  are  only  to  regard  the 
two  members  of  the  first  part  of  the  verse  as  of 
greater  length.     There  is  apparently  no  exact 
measure  for  the  number  of  syllables  of  the  seve- 
ral members.    The  thought  that  Jerusalem  in  her 
misery   remembers    her  prese7it   misery    [which 
would  be  the  sense  according  to  Ewald's  emen- 
dation] is  unnatural;   for  niir  [to  call  to  mind,  to 
remember]    always   suggests    something  distant, 
remote,  in  reference  to  space  or  time,  and,  in  the 
latter  relation,  either  past  or  future.     Besides, 
the  words,  "  that  she  had  in  the  days  of  old,"  so 
appropriate  in  ver.  7,  would  be  altogether  super- 
fluous   and    confusing  in  ver.    10. — when  her 
people  fell  into  the  hand  of  the  enemy, 
when  her  people  fall  by  the  hand  of  the  oppressor 


46 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


This  is  a  more  particular  description  of  "  the 
days  of  her  affliction."  They  were  the  days 
when  her  people  fell  by  the  hand  of  their  ene- 
mies.— and  none  did  help  her,  and  she  has 
no  helper.     [So  all  the  Eng.  Versions,  except  E. 

v.] the  adversaries  saw  her,  her  oppressors 

behold  her.  The  constructiim  is  determined  by 
what  precedes,  according  to  acknowledged  usage. 
See  my  Gr.,  ^'J9. — [D.'s'i^^ciy  ^.te,  has  here  the 
sense  of  looking  at  in  the  way  of  inspection,  be- 
holding (Broughton),  perhaps  in  the  sense  of 
'looking  at  a  person  wiih  saiisfaction  or  joy,'  to 
'feast  the  eyes  upon  one  with  malicious  joy '  (see 
Fuerst's  Lci:.).  The  remark  of  Dr.  J.  A.  Alex- 
ander on  Is.  liii.  2,  that  HXt  ''means  to  view 
with  pleasure  only  when  followed  by  the  prepo- 
sition 3,"  needs  qualification. — W.  H.  H.] — 
and  did  mock  —  they  mock — at  her  Sab- 
baths. TS^'^iiT^^  is  an  a;?,  ley.  The  sense  of  the 
word  itself  is  clear.  It  can  only  m^Au  cessationes, 
excidia  [cessations,  destructions].  But  the 
choice  of  a  word  else  unused,  seems  t/O  indicate 
that  the  scorn  of  their  enemies  was  of  an  equivo- 
cal character;  namely,  they  scoffed  not  only  be- 
cause Zion  had  come  to  its  end,  but  likewise  be- 
cause now  a  general  Sabbath,  a  day  of  rest  for 
the  land  in  a  bad  sense,  had  begun.  We  have 
then  a  proof  that  the  Sabbath  was  to  the  heathen, 
even  before  the  days  of  Rome  (see  Juv.  Sat.  XIV. 
96-106;  Pers.  V.  179-184;  Mart.  IV.  4,  7),  an 
occasion  for  mockery.  [Hugh  Broughton: 
"  This  prophesieth  how  in  Babel  they  will  mourn 
for  desire  unto  their  feasts,  which  in  their  Land 
they  would  not  keep  aright.  And  the  Chaldeans 
will  scoff  at  their  Sabbatisms,  as  did  long  after 
Horace,  Ovid,  and  other  Poets, — and  Tully, 
too,  deserving  to  have  his  head  cut  off  and  his 
tongue  pricked,  as  he  had.  The  Ps.  cxxxvii. 
commenteth  upon  this  verse."]  This  early 
mockery  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath  would  be  more 
likely  to  happen,  since  it  would  naturally  come 
to  the  ears  of  those  who  destroyed  Jerusalem, 
that  the  commandment  itself  predicted  to  the 
disobedient  people  a  time  of  desolation,  as  an 
involuntary  Sabbath  rest  of  the  land.  See  Lev. 
xxvi.  34,  43  ;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  21.  I  believe, 
therefore,  that  the  old  explanation  of  Vulg., 
Arab.,  LniHEE,  L.  Capelle,  translating  D"'P3B'D 


by  Sabbaths,  is  right,  so  far  as  it  allows  an  equi- 
vocal sense  of  this  word.  [This  word  has  given 
tlie  translators  and  commentators  much  trouble. 
The  Sept.  translates  it  by  pcrocKeaia,  "and 
mocked  at  her  captivity,"  deriving  the  noun 
from  7131!^,  caplivum  ducere.     The  other  Versions 

T   T  •* 

vary.  Blayney  :  ^^discontinuance;"  "Houbi- 
G\Nr  justly  ob'^erves  that  riDty  is  nowhere  used 
for  Sabbath,  etc.  But  without  taking  the  liberty 
which  he  does  of  substituting  auotiier  word, 
niatJ'D,  the  use  of  the  verb  I^2lif  will  justify 
giving  to  nr\3iyO  a  sense  well  suited  to  the  exi- 
gence of  the  passage,  namely,  •  her  disconti- 
nuance,' that  is,  the  ceasing,  or  causing  to  cease, 
of  her,  or  of  her  former  prosperity."  Booth- 
ROYD  and  NoYEs:  "destruction."  Henderson: 
"they   laughed    at   her  ruin,"   "n'ri3K/D,  lit., 

her  ruined  circumstances  ;  the  state  of  the  complete 
cessation  of  all  the  active  businesses  of  life.  Root, 
r\2]if  to  cease;  Hiph.,  to  put  an  end  to,  cause  to 
cease.'''  Broughton:  "Sabbatisms ;"  (which,  as 
preserving  the  equivocal  sense,  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred).— Blayney  :  "  Some  critics  have  been 
willing  to  discard  this  line.  Her  oppressors  behold 
her — they  mock  at  her  Sabbaths — as  well  as  the 
fourth  in  ii.  19,  but  for  no  better  reason  than 
because  all  tlie  other  periods  in  the  two  chapters 
consist  of  three  lines  only.  But  I  think  this  not 
a  sufficient  ground,  in  opposition  to  the  authority 
of  all  the  Hebrew  copies  and  ancient  Versions." 
Henderson,  who  makes  four  lines  of  this  verse, 
and  only  three  of  the  others,  remarks,  "there  is 
no  reason  to  believe  that  Jeremiah  considered 
himself  so  rigidly  bound  to  adhere  to  his  triple 
arrangement,  as  on  no  occasion  to  break  through 
it  in  order  to  give  utterance  to  a  thought  forcibly 
bearing  on  the  statement  which  he  had  just 
made."  Why  then  adopt  an  artificial  style  at 
all  ?  But  there  is  no  necessity  for  making  four 
members  instead  of  three  of  this  verse.  Each 
member  consists  of  two  distinctly  marked  clauses ; 
and  in  this  verse  the  first  member  has  two  clauses 
of  more  than  usual  length.  Naegelsbach's  ar- 
rangement of  the  lines  in  sixes,  instead  of  trip- 
lets, plainly  disposes  of  this  difficulty,  and  its 
correctness  is  vindicated  by  the  accents. — 
W.  H.  H.] 


I.  8-11. 


8  Jerusalem  hath  grievously  sinned ;  therefore  she  is  removed :  all  that  honored 
her,  despise  her,  because  they  have  seen  her  nakedness ;    yea,  she  sigheth,  and 

9  tumeth  backward.     Her  filthiness  is  in  her  skirts ;  she  remembereth  not  her  last 
end  ;  therefore  she  came  down  wonderfully :  she  had  no  comforter.     O  Lord,  be- 

10  hold  my  afflictions ;  for  the  enemy  hath  magnified  himself.  The  adversary  hath 
spread  out  his  hand  upon  all  her  pleasant  things :  for  she  hath  seen  that  the  heathen 
entered  into  her  sanctuary,  whom  thou  didst  command  that  they  should  not  enter 

1 1  into  thy  congregation.  AH  her  people  sigh,  they  seek  bread :  they  have  given 
their  pleasant  things  for  meat  to  relieve  the  soul :  see,  O  Lord,  and  consider ;  for 
I  am  become  vile. 


CHAP.  I.  8-11. 


47 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  8. — riNDH   NCSn.     See  my  (?r.,  J93,  cf,  note.    The  form  XCOn  (frequent  in  Deuteronomy,  xv.  9  ;   xxi.  22,  efc, 
T  :  |T         :   ••  :  ■• 

comp.  Is.  xxxi.  7  ;  liii.  12  ;  IIos.  xii.  9)  is  never  found  in  Jeremiah,  and  in  Lam.  only  here  and  iii.  39.  Jeremiah  uses  only 
the  form  r>X£3n,  ^vi.  10,  18  ;    xvii.  1,  3  ;    xviii.  23,  et  al.     The  verb  XDH   >8  frequent  with  him,  ii.  35  ;    iii.  25  ;    viii.  14. — 

T  -  I  T  T 

[Blatnet  :    "  For  PIT  J  ?!  which  occurs  nowhere  else,  nineteen   MSS.,  and  the  first  edition  of  the  Hagiographa,  read 

TTIJ  7,  as  at  ver.  17  and  various  other  places."] — ^^30,  not  found  in  Jeremiah ;  1  Sam.  ii.  30;  2  Sam.  x.  3;  Prov.  xiv.  31. — 
T'  :  •"  -  : 

The  Hiphil  form,  7'Tn  (not  to  be  confounded  with  "^'IH  from  7TJ,  Is.  xlviii.  21),  occurs  only  here.  See  Olsh.,  J 255,  A, 
note.     In  Jer.  xv.  19  we  find  '?7iT,  abjectum,  vile.    [The  word  is  from  77I,  Chaldaic  inflexion.     See  Benjamin  Davidson, 

"T 

Analyi.  Lex.,  §18,  14;  or  from   7^1,  see  Fuerst,  Lex. — W.  H.  H.] — 711"^ J^,  not  found  in  Jeremiah.     See  Is.  xlvii.  3;  Ezek. 

T  :  *.• 

xvi.  37.    [Cranmer,  Bishops'  'B.,JiUhiness  ;  Broughton,  Boothrotd,  Notes,  shame.] — TIHX  is  found  in  Jeremiah  only  with 

"inT],  XV.  6,  and  J1DJ,  xxxviii.  22;  xlvi.  5. 
'-  T  T 

Ver.  9. — nnXOtD-    EWALD,  wholly  unnecessarily,  would  read  nnXD£3,  sJie  polluted  (3194,  6).    The  word  is  not  found 
TT  :  ■•.  T|-:  |T 

in  Jeremiah. — D'X73.  ace.  adverbial.     See  r\1N7£}J,  Jobxxxvii.  5;   mx*^ij,  Ps.  Ixv.  6  ;    D*"^tJ'^0,  Ps.  Ixxv.  3  ;  my  G^., 

1  -t:  t:-  t  't" 

J  70,  k. — 7'njn  requires  neither  1K?3J  nor  V3  to  complete  the  sense.  The  object  lies  in  the  verb  itself.  The  direct  causa- 
tive is  needed  (see  my  Cfr.,  §  18,  3).  It  also  means,  to  play  the  part  of  or  to  affect  greatness  ;  see  Jer.  xlviii.  26,  42 ;  comp.  1 
Sam.  xl.  41.  [i'UERST  gives  this  verb  an  inchoative  sense,  to  grow  violent.  This  sense  of  the  word  seems  to  have  induced 
the  inaccurate  translation  of  Blatnet,  Behold  how  an  enemy  hath  aggravated  mine  affliction.  Boothrotd  gives  same  sense. 
— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  10. — E''^3  (see  vers.  13,  17 ;  iv.  4)  is  not  strange  to  the  vocabulary  of  Jeremiah :  iv.  31 ;  xvi.  7  ;  xlviii.  40 ;  xlix.  22. 

-T 

— Before  1K3  supply  Ti^K- — [Henderson:  "The  PI  in  niTIV  is  merely  the  fuller  form  of  the  pronominal  fragment  for 

T  V-:  T   ■  ■ 

JT^X,  the  common  form.    It  is  omitted  in  some  MSS."] 

T      " 

Ver.  11. —  DiT^IDnO)  see  vers.  7, 10.    [Henderson:  the  form  is  "quite  irregular.    It  is  corrected  in  the  K'ri,  which 

rejects  the  V    The  word  is  thus  exhibited  in  a  great  number  of  MSS.  and  in  eight  printed  editions."] — 73i?3.     3  indicates 

something  given  in  the  way  of  price  or  wages ;  see  Gen.  xxix.  18 ;  xxx.  26 ;  Is.  vii.  23 ;  my  Gr.,  §  112,  5,  a.     73N  is  not  found 

inJeremiah.     Hesays  H^DX,  xii- 19;  or  SdXJD.  vii.  33  ;  xvi. 4;  xix.7;  xxxiv.20.— t^3J   ^'C'llS  occurs  vers.  16,19;  Ruth 

T  :  T  T":  |-  VT  ■    T  : 

iv.  15  ;  Ps.  xix.  8  ;  Prov.  xxv.  13,  never  in  Jeremiah. — riD'SHI   PINT.     These  two  imperatives  are  found  together,  only  in 

T    '  -  ;        ••    : 
the  reverse  order,  in  Job  xxxv.  5 ;  Is.  Ixiii.  15  ;  Ps.  Ixxx.  15  ;  cxlii.  5.   In  the  Lamentations  we  also  have  !|X"^1  ^£D'3n,  Ter. 

12 ;  t3'3n  nX'l^,  ver.  1,  and  riD'SH  alone  iii.  63.    Jeremiah  never  uses  the  verb  £33  J,  which  Isaiah  uses  constantly,  v.  12, 

30 ;  viii.  22  ;  xviii.  4 ;  xlii.  18  ;  Ixiii.  15  ;  xx.  5,  6,  etc. — 717711  occurs  once  in  Jer.  xv.  19.     See  ni'7''Tni  ver.  8.     The  word  is 

T"  T 

used   in   a  contemptuous   sense  ;    Zion   [Jerusalem]   has   become  a   DUJ    3VJ^  (Jer.  xxii.  28)  when    she   ought  to  bo 

D'ij   r\1N3V   '3y    n7nj  (Jer.  m.  19).    [7711  is  properly  the  participle  of  7 7T,  to  s^afce^o  and /ro,  to  toft«r,  hence  Sgura- 
.  .       .  .         — .|_  ..  _^ 

lively  to  be  low,  bad,  contemptible,  abject,  mean,  and  then  again  figuratively  to  be  miserable,  unhappy,  in  which  last  sense  it  is 
used  here.    See  Fuerst,  Lex. — W.  H.  H.J 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  8.  It  is  sin  that  has  made  Jerusalem  an 
object  of  abhorrence.  Her  uncleanness  has  be- 
come notorious :  therefore  those  who  might  com- 
fort her  keep  far  from  her,  while  her  heathen 
oppressors,  who,  according  to  the  law,  should 
keep  away  from  her,  have  free  access  to  her. — 
Jerusalem  hath  grievously  sinned.  [Lit., 
hath  sinned  a  sin.  This  Hebraism  suggests  the 
idea,  not  only  of  a  sin  of  a  grievous  character, 
but  of  sin  persevered  in,  and  its  guilt  aggravated 
by  constant  repetition.  So  Cranmer  translates: 
"Jerusalem  hath  sinned  ever  more  and  more." 
Naegelsbach,  poetically,  if  not  accurately: 
Ges'dndigt,  gemndigt  hat  Jerusalem.  Calvin  : 
"  Here  the  Prophet  expresses  more  clearly  and 
strongly  what  he  had  briefly  referred  to,  even 
that  all  the  evils  which  the  Jews  suffered  pro- 
ceeded from  God's  vengeance,  and  that  they  were 
worthy  of  such  a  punishment,  because  they  had 
not  lightly  ofl'ended,  but  had  heaped  up  for 
themselves  a  dreadful  judgment,  since  they  had 
in  all  manner  of  ways  abandoned  themselves  to 
impiety.  This  is  the  substance  of  what  is  said." 
— W.  H.  H.] — Therefore    she    is    removed. 


[Correctly,  therefore  she  is  become  vile.  West- 
minster Annotations:  "She  is  become  as  a 
woman  separated  for  her  uncleanness,"  Lev.  xv. 
19;  Ezek.  xxii.  10;  xxxvi.  17  ;  or,  an  abominable 
thing,  for  so  also  is  the  word  used  in  an  abstract 
notion.  Lev.  xx.  21;  2  Chron.  xxix.  6;  Ezra  ix. 
11.  So  ver.  17.— W.  H.  H.]— All  that  ho- 
noured her  despise  her.  Those  who  formerly 
honored  Jerusalem,  her  friends  and  allies,  now 
despise  her.  [Calvin:  "This  also  did  not  a 
little  increase  the  grievousness  of  her  calamity  ; 
she  had  been  repudiated  by  her  friends,  by 
whom  she  had  before  been  valued  and  honored. 
The  reason  is  mentioned."] — Because  they 
have  seen  her  nakedness.  By  the  discovery 
of  her  nakedness  we  are  to  understand,  not 
merely  that  after  the  removal  of  all  protecting 
covering  (e.  e.,  of  all  means  of  defence),  men 
could  see  and  even  enter  into  the  precincts  of 
her  innermost  recesses,  but  especially  that  in 
this  way  the  nakedness  of  Jerusalem,  in  a  moral 
sense,  has  become  notorious.  In  reference  to 
her  nakedness  in  this  moral  sense,  Nebuzaradan 
said  (Jer.  xl.  3),  "because  ye  have  sinned 
against  Jehovah,  and  have  not  obeyed  His  voice, 
therefore  this  thing  is  come  upon  you."  Se« 
Delitzsch  on  Is.  xlvii.  3:   "The  nakedness  of 


48 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Babylon  is  her  shameful  deeds,  which  are  become 
manifest  as  such."  The  same  figure  of  speech 
is  found  in  Hos.  ii.  10;  Nah.  iii.  5;  Ezek.  xiii. 
37. — Yea,  she  sigheth.  [Yea,  she  herself,  or, 
as  for  herself  she  sigheth,  etc. — W.  H.  H.] — 
And  turneth  backward.  The  shame  of  Je- 
rusalem is  so  manifest  that  she  herself  cannot 
deny  it.  There  remains  nothing  for  her  to  do, 
but  groaning  to  hide  herself.  See  ver.  13  ;  ii. 
3  ;  Ps.  ix.  4;  xliv.  11  ;  Ivi.  10.  [The  sense 
seems  to  be  that  she  herself  is  so  self-convicted 
and  striclien  with  grief  and  mortification,  that 
she  can  only  sigli  and  turn  her  back  upon  the 
spectators  in  the  vain  endeavor  to  hide  her 
shame.  This  would  be  very  natural  in  the  case 
of  a  naked  woman,  and  such  is  the  disagreeable 
image  employed  by  the  poet.  Naegelsbach: 
und  wendete  sich  ziiruck,  lit.,  and  turned  herself 
round.  The  only  other  sense  that  can  be  put 
upon  the  phrase  is  to  regard  it  as  expressive  of 
despair.  So  Calvin,  "to  turn  backward  means 
the  same  as  to  be  deprived  of  all  hope  of  resto- 
ration." But  the  correctness  of  such  an  inter- 
pretation is  far  from  obvious.  The  other  is 
more  natural  and  probable.  West.  Annotations  : 
"  Yea,  she  sigheth  and  turneth  backward  for 
shame;  as  those  in  such  case  would  do,  that  have 
any  shamefacedness,  or  spark  of  ingenuity  at  all 
in  them,  see  Is.  xlvii.  5  :  for  they  seem  to  swerve 
here  from  the  genuine  sense,  who  understand 
the  term  turning  back  as  intimating  a  want  of 
power  to  stand  to  it,  or  to  rise  and  recover 
again,  as  Jer.  xlvi.  5." — W.  H.  H.] 

HTJ  7,  vile.     The  old  translators  derive  the 

T   •  ; 

word  from  l-IJ,  vagari,  errare,  in  the  sense  of 
agitatio,  jactatio  facta,  i.  e.,  agitata  jactata  est. 
Others  take  it  in  the  sense  of  HUD  (Ps.  xliv.  15), 
that  at  which  men  shake  the  head  [as  an  expres- 
sion of  contemptuous  pity. — W.  H.  II.].  But  the 
connection  requires  that  the  word  be  used  in  the 
sense  of  that  which  excites  abhorrence  :  for,  ac- 
cording to  the  following  clause,  Jerusalem  is 
despised  because  men  now  see  her  nakedness 
and  her  uncleanness.  Since  the  lengthening  of 
a  syllable,  to  compensate  for  the  doubling  of  the 
following     consonant,    is     not   infrequent    [see 

ni/'in  for  n^lvin,  next  clause,  and  Green's  Gr., 

T  •    •  T  ■    • 

§  141,  3. — W.  H.  H.],  we  may  take  T\Ti  as  ano- 
ther form  of  mj  (ver.  17).  See  Ot^sH.,  ^  82,  c. 
But  mj  is  that  which  one  avoids,  flings  away 
from  him  as  vile,  abominates,  that  which  is  un- 
clean, an  object  of  abhorrence,  and  then  the 
condition  [or  state,  in  the  abstract]  of  unclean- 
ness. It  is  especially  used  of  the  uncleanness  of 
women  (Lev.  xii.  2;  xv.  19,  etc.).  Here  it  would 
denote  the  person  afflicted  with  such  unclean- 
ness, and  become,  on  that  account,  an  object  of 
abhorrence,  as  Ezek.  xviii.  6  speaks  of  a  nC'X 
mj.     Neither  HTJ  nor  mj  occur  in  Jeremiah. 

T  •  T     •  T 

[The  authorities  for  the  translation  of  this  word 
are  about  equally  divided.  Those  that  agree 
with  our  author  are:  the  Syr.,  horror;  Ital.,  a 
laughing-stock ;  Ger.,  ein  unreines  Weil> ;  Blay- 
NKY,  one  set  apart  for  unclean;  Henderson,  un- 
clean; NoYEs,  vile.  On  the  other  hand  we  have: 
Sept.,  Jluctualion;    Vulg.,    instable;    Targ.,    va- 


grant; Cranmer  and  Bishops'  B.,  therefore  she  is 
come  in  decay;  E.  V.  and  Boothroyd,  therefore 
she  is  removed.  Calvin,  therefore  she  is  become  a 
wanderer;  "the  word  ought  properly  to  be  ap- 
plied to  their  exile,  when  the  Jews  became  un- 
fixed and  vagrants:"  to  which  his  English  Edi- 
tor, Piev.  John  Owen,  adds  this  note,  "the  re- 
ference here  is  evidently  to  banishment,  and  not 
to  uncleanness,  as  some  take  it,  because  the  noun 
is  sometimes  so  taken,  persons  being  removed 
from  society  on  account  of  uncleanness."  Hugh 
Broughton,  thcrifore  came  she  into  dispersion, 
"such  uncertainty  of  place  as  Cain  had.  Gen.  iv., 
wandering  from  place  to  place."  The  argument 
derived  from  the  connection  seems  to  be  decisive 
in  favor  of  the  first  opinion,  therefore  is  she  be- 
come vile,  or  abominable,  Naegelsbach,  zum  Ab- 
schcu.~W.  II.  II.] 

Ver.  9.  Her  fllthiness  is  in  her  skirts. — 
Zion  [Jerusaleiri]  for  a  long  time  trifled  with  sin. 
She  believed  the  evil  she  did  would  not  become 
manifest  to  her  injury.  Now  it  is  all  become 
manifest.  Her  uncleanness  has  come  to  the  sur- 
face: it  is  no  longer  hidden  within  her,  but  it  is 
on  her  skirts  (see  Jer.  xiii.  22,  26;  Nah.  iii.  5). 
[Wordsworth:  "  It  is  visible  to  all ;  she  cnnnot 
deny  her  uncleanness."  Calvin  refers  this  to 
the  punishment,  rather  than  the  guilt  of  their 
sin ;  as  Lowtu  remarks:  "  she  carries  the  marks 
of  her  sins  in  the  greatness  of  her  punishment." 
The  idea  of  personal  uncleanness,  however,  is 
stated  with  such  revolting  plainness  that  we  can- 
not fail  to  see  that  the  very  punishment  consists 
in  the  exposure  of  her  moral  pollution.  See  Jer. 
ii.  19,  22,  34.— W.  H.  H.]— She  remembereth 
not  her  last  end.  She  considered  not  what 
the  end  would  be.  She  did  not  in  the  beginning 
I'oflect  what  the  consequences  of  her  siu  must 
be.  [^AssEM.  Aiinot. :  '^  She  remembered  not.  She 
considered  not,  when  time  was,  what  the  issue  of 
her  wicked  courses  would  be,  what  they  would 
bring  her  to  at  last ;  see  Deut.  xxxii.  29.  So  was 
it  with  Babel,  Isa.  xlvii.  7,  and  with  this  people, 
though  forewarned  of  it,  Jer.  ii.  25."  Calvin 
understands  this  to  mean,  "that  the  Jews  were 
so  overwhelmed  with  despair,  that  they  did  not 
raise  up  their  thoughts  to  God's  promises; — they 
were  so  demented  by  their  sorrow,  tliat  they  be- 
came stujjified,  and  entertained  no  liope  as  to  the 
future."  This  interpretation  grows  out  of  the 
view  that  the  first  clause  refers  to  the  punishment 
of  sin  and  not  to  sin  itself;  and  is  inconsistent 
with  the  apparent  sense,  with  the  context  and 
with  the  ordinary  use  of  the  phrase  "  remem- 
bering the  latter  end." — W.  H.  H.] — Therefore 
she  came  down  w^onderfully. — Lit.  She 
considered  not  her  latter  end,  and  came  down 
wonderfully.  In  consequence  of  her  want  of 
consideration  she  has  fallen  and  is  degraded  from 
her  high  estate.  See  Deut.  xxviii.  43 ;  Jer.  xlviii. 
18. — She  had — has — no  comforter.  See  ver. 
2. — O  Lord,  behold  my  affliction,  for  the 
enemy  hath  magnified, — doth  magnifg — him- 
self.— A  pious  ejaculation,  which  is  put  in  the 
mouth  of  Zion  [Jerusalem]  herself.  Jehovah  is 
implored  to  observe  how  proudly  the  enemy,  to 
whom  Zion  [Jerusalem]  is  no  match,  exalts  him- 
self. [liENDERsoN:  "After  ascribing  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem  to  heedless  indulgence  in  sin,  by  a 
striking  prosopopeia,   he  introduces  her  as  im- 


CHAP.   I.  8-11. 


49 


ploring  the  compassionate  regard  of  Jehovah." 
See,  for  a  strikingly  similar  rhetorical  construc- 
tion, Gen.  xlix.  18. — The  idea  in  the  hist  clause, 
for  the  enemy  magnifies  himself,  is  that  the  enemy 
increases  his  insolence  and  violence  (see  gram, 
note  above),  he  is  growing  more  and  more  vin- 
dictive. This  may  be  considered,  not  only  as  a 
reason  why  Jerusalem  utters  a  cry  to  God,  but 
as  an  argument  addressed  to  God  for  His  inter- 
position. So  Calvin  represents  it :  '"  The  Pro- 
phet, in  order  to  obtain  favor,  says,  that  enemies 
had  greatly  exalted  themselves.  And  this  deserves 
a  special  notice ;  for  what  seems  to  occasion 
despair  to  us,  ought,  on  the  contrary,  to  en- 
courage us  to  entertain  good  hope,  that  is,  when 
enemies  are  insolent  and  carry  themselves  with 
great  arrogance  and  insult  us.  The  greater  and 
the  less  tolerable  their  pride  is,  with  more  con- 
fidence may  we  call  on  God,  for  the  Holy  Spirit 
has  not  in  vain  taught  us  this  truth,  that  God 
will  be  propitious  to  us  when  enemies  thus  greatly 
exalt  themselves,  that  is,  when  they  become  be- 
yond measure  proud,  and  immoderately  indulge 
themselves  in  every  kind  of  contempt." — W.H.H.] 

Ver.  10.  Since  Zion  [Jerusalem]  has  not  pre- 
served the  sanctuary  of  her  heart  from  pollution 
by  the  enemy  of  her  soul,  but  has  suffered  that 
enemy  to  rob  her  of  her  spiritual  treasures,  she 
must  not  wonder  if  her  earthly  enemies  desecrate 
by  their  presence  her  earthly  sanctuary,  and 
stretch  out  the  hand  towards  its  precious  things. 
— The  adversary  hath  spread  out  his  hand 
[or  rather,  stretched  it  out,  (so  Fuerst,  Nae- 
GELSBACH,  and  AssEM.  Annol.),  as  about  to  seize 
and  appropriate  them. — W.  H.  H.],  upon  all 
her  pleasant  things.  Precious,  or  glorious 
things.  The  vessels  and  treasures  of  the  Temple 
are  intended  (see  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  10;  Jer.  lii. 
17  ff. ),  as  is  evident  from  the  explanatory  con- 
junction for  with  which  the  next  clause  begins: 
for  she  hath  seen  that  the  heathen  entered 
into  her  sanctuary,  v7hom  Thou  didst 
command  that  they  should  not  enter  into 
Thy  congregation.  In  Deut.  xxiii.  2,  3,  we 
tind  the  command  never  to  allow  Ammonites  and 
Moabites  to  come  into  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord.  This  special  command  was  afterwards  ap- 
plied to  all  the  heathen:  Ezek.  xliv.  7,  9;  Neh. 
xiii.  3.  We  are  reminded  also  of  the  Porch  of 
the  heathen,  violation  of  which,  according  to  Jo- 
sephus  (Jewish  Wars,  VI.,  2,  4;  comp.  Acts  xxi. 
28),  was  forbidden  on  pain  of  death.  [Observe 
♦,he  antithesis  between  sanctuary  and  congregation. 
BooTHROYD  expresses  this  in  his  translation,  in 
which  he  says  "the  sense  is  given  and  not  the 
idiom  :"  Surely  she  hath  seen  nations  enter  into  her 
sanctuary,  whom  Thou  didst  forbid  to  enter  even  into 
Thy  congregation.  Those  who  were  forbidden  even 
to  worship  with  the  people,  had  intruded  into  the 
holy  place — only  priests  might  enter.  "If  even 
their  entering  to  perform  an  act  of  worship  would 
have  been  construed  as  a  violation  of  the  pre- 
cept, how  much  more  when  it  had  for  its  ob- 
ject destruction  and  spoliation  "  (Henderson). 
— W.  H.  H.] 

[Naegelsbach  translates :  For  she  saw  heathen 
who  came  into  her  sanctuary.  It  would  be  better 
to  translate.  For  she  hath  seen  how  heathen  came, 
etc.  1  have  tried  to  preserve  the  same  form 
of  the  verb  1ND  in  both  clauses  by  making  heathen 


the  object  of  one  verb  and  subject  of  the  other. 
If  this  is  a  fault,  I  share  it  in  company  with  old 
Hugh  Brouohton  and  with  Blatney.  The 
Cranmkr  and  Bishops'  Bibles  give  the  sense 
excellently:  "Yea,  even  before  her  eyes  came 
the  heathen  in  and  out  of  the  sanctuary;  whom 
Thou  (nevertheless)  hast  forbidden  to  come 
within  Thy  congregation." — It  is  difiicult  to  pre- 
serve the   force  of  the  final  word   "il,    without 

'  T 

putting  the  clause  in  quotation  marks.  The 
possessive  pronoun  in  the  English  version  "  thy 
congregation  "  must  refer  to  the  people,  not  to 
God.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  11.  To  dreadful  spiritual  distress  is  added 
the  greatest  bodily  want,  hunger.  The  Israelites 
must  part  with  their  jewels  in  order  to  procure 
necessary  food.  See  ver.  19.  [All  her  people 
sigh.  The  distress  is  real  and  universal.  In  ver.  4 
the  priests  sigh ;  in  ver.  8  the  ideal  person,  Jeru- 
salem, sigheth  :  but  here  we  have,  not  a  poetical 
image,  but  the  actual  groaning  of  the  people, 
suiferiiig  with  hunger  and  searching  for  food. — • 
They  seek  bread,  or  rather  seeking  Jor  bread. 
Tills  expresses  the  reason  for  their  sighing. — 
They  have  given  [they  give)  their  pleasant 
things  [precious  things,  Broughton,  Cranmer, 
Bishops'  Bible,  Henderson,  Noyes  ;  Jewels, 
Naegelsbach,  Wordsworth);  for  meat  (food). 
By  precious  things  are,  doubtless,  meant  those 
ornaments  which  oriental  women  value  so  high- 
ly. "A  striking  illustration  of  this  is  given 
by  Mr.  Roberts: — 'the  people  of  the  East  re- 
tain tiieir  little  valuables,  such  as  jewels  and 
rich  ro!i"s,  to  the  last  extremity.  To  part  with 
that,  wliich  has  perhaps  been  a  kind  of  heir- 
loom in  the  family,  is  like  parting  with  life. 
Have  they  sold  the  last  wreck  of  their  other 
property;  are  they  on  the  verge  of  death? — 
the  emaciated  members  of  the  family  are  called 
together,  and  some  one  undertakes  the  heart- 
rending task  of  proposing  such  a  bracelet,  or  arm- 
let, or  ear-ring,  or  the  pendant  of  the  forehead, 
to  be  sold.  For  a  moment  all  are  silent,  till  the 
mother  or  daughters  burst  into  tears,  and  then 
the  contending  feelings  of  hunger,  and  love  for 
their  'pleasant  things  '  alternately  prevail.  In 
general,  the  conclusion  is  to  pledge,  and  not  to 
sell  their  much-loved  ornaments;  but  such  is  the 
rapacity  of  those  who  have  money,  and  such  the 
extreme  penury  of  those  who  have  once  fallen, 
that  they  seldom  regain  them"  {Oriental  Illus- 
trations, p.  483).  "Under  such  circumstances, 
and  particularly  in  times  of  public  calamity,  it 
often  happens  that  jewels  and  other  property  of 
most  valuable  description,  are  disposed  of  for  the 
merest  trifle,  that  a  little  bread  may  be  obtained 
to  relieve  the  soul''  [Pictorial  Bible,  Lon.  See  also 
Comp.  Comm.).—W.  H.  H.]— To  relieve  the 
soul  [marg.  E.  V.,  to  make  the  soul  to  come  again']. 
The  meaning  is  evident  from  1  Kings  xvii.  21, 
22  ;  1  Sam.  xxx.  12  ;  Jud.  xv.  19.  [To  sustain 
life  :  lit.,  to  cause  the  breath,  or  life  to  return. 
"  This  mode  of  expression  is  founded  on  the  ideM, 
that  when  one  is  faint,  the  breath  or  life  is  as  it 
were  gone"  (Henderson).  See  Job  ii.  4,  "all  thiit 
a  man  hath  will  he  give  for  his  life." — W.  H.  H] 
See,  O  Lord,  and  consider.  See  vers.  9,  20  • 
ii.  10:  v.  1;  comp.  iii.  63;  iv.  16.  —  [Fori  am 
become  vile.   How  wretched  I  am  become.   There 


5U  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

is  certainly,  as  Hendebson  remarks,  *'  some-  |  dresa  of  Jerusalem  to  Jehovah  begins  with  the 
thing  incongruous  in  assigning  her  vileness  as  a  \  last  clause  of  ver.  9,  and  is  continued  down  to 
reason  why  God  should  regard  Jerusalem;"  |  end  of  this  verse.  The  appeal  to  God  in  the  last 
what  is  here  meant  is,  as  Henderson  acknow-  clause  of  ver.  10,  which  Thou  commandest,  etc  , 
ledges  while  he  retains  the  word  "vile,"  "  not  i  and  again  this  prayer  to  God  at  the  close  ver.  11, 
her  moral  pollution,  but  her  abject  and  despised  ,  shows  that  the  whole  is  addressed  to  Him :  the 
condition,  which  was  exposed  to  all  around  her."  l  use  of  the  third  person  instead  of  the  first  in  the 

Naegelsbach  with  the  last  clause  of  this  verse  ,  first  two  clauses  both  of  ver.  10  and  ver.  11,  does 

begins  an  entirely  new  section.     In  all  that  fol- 1  not   refute  this,  as  the  change  from  the  first  to 
lows,  he  says,  down  to  ver.  16  Zion  herself  speaks,  j  the  third  person  is  so  frequent   in   Hebrew  de- 
She  entreats  first  Jehovah,  then  all  passers-by  to  j  scriptive  poetry. — W.  H.  H.] 
regard  her  misery.     In  fact,  however,  the  ad- 1 


PART  II. 
I.  12-22. 

*?  Ver.  12.  Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  pass  by  ? 
Behold  and  see 
If  there  be  any  sorrow  like  unto  my  sorrow, 

Which  is  inflicted  on  me. 
Wherewith  Jehovah  hath  afflicted  me 
In  the  day  of  His  fierce  anger ! 

0  Ver.  13.  From  on  high  hath  He  sent  fire  into  my  bonee, 

And  it  subdued  them. 
He  hath  spread  a  net  for  my  feet, 

He  hath  turned  me  back. 
He  hath  made  me  desolate — 

All  the  day  long  sorrowful !  . 
i  Ver.  14.  The  yoke  of  my  sins  is  bound  fast  to  His  hand. 

They  are  twined  together. 
They  rise  up  above  my  neck. 

He  hath  caused  my  strength  to  fail. 
The  Lord  hath  delivered  me  into  the  hands  of  those 

Whom  I  cannot  resist. 
D  Ver.  15.  The  Lord  hath  made  despicable  all  my  mighty  men 

In  the  midst  of  me. 
He  hath  proclaimed  a  set-time  against  me 

To  crush  ray  young  men. 
The  Lord  hath  trodden  the  wine-press 

As  to  the  virgin,  Judah's  daughter, 
^  Ver.  16.  For  these  things  I  weep. 

Mine  eye,  mine  eye — runneth  down  with  water. 
Because  the  Comforter — Restorer  of  my  soul — 

I?  far  from  me 
My  children  are  perishing 

Because  the  enemy  prevails. 

f)  Ver.  17.  Zion  stretches  out  her  hands, 

But  there  is  no  Comforter  for  her. 

Jehovah  has  given  charge  concerning  Jacob 
That  his  neighbors  be  his  enemies. 

Jerusalem  has  become 

An  abomination  in  the  midst  of  them. 


CHAP.  I.  12-22.  51 


V  Ver.  18.  Jehovah — He  is  righteous : 

For  I  have  disobeyed  His  commandment. 
Hear,  I  pray  you,  all  ye  peoples, 

And  behold  my  sorrow. 
My  virgins  and  ray  young  men 
Are  gone  into  captivity, 
p  Ver.  19.  I  called  to  my  lovers  : 
They  deceived  me. 
My  priests  and  my  elders 

Expired  in  the  city, 
For  they  sought  food  for  themselves 
To  revive  their  souls. 

*)  Ver.  20.  Behold,  O  Jehovah,  how  I  am  distressed! 

My  bowels  are  greatly  troubled. 
My  heart  is  turned  within  me. 

For  I  have  grievously  rebelled ; 
Abroad  the  sword  bereaveth, 

At  home  — Death ! 
t^  Ver.  21.  They  heard  that  I  sigh. 

That  I  have  no  Comforter. 
All  my  enemies  heard  of  my  trouble. 

They  rejoiced  that  Thou  hadst  done  it, 
That  Thou  hast  brought  the  day  Thou  hadst  proclaimed. 

But  they  shall  be  like  me ! 
n  Ver.  22.  Let  all  their  wickedness  come  before  Thee ; 

And  do  unto  them 
As  thou  hast  done  unto  me 

For  all  my  transgressions  : 
For  my  sighs  are  many 

And  my  heart  is  faint. 

ANALYSIS. 

From  the  last  clause  of  verse  11,  the  Poet  lets  Zion  [Jerusalem]  herself  speak,  as  she  had  done  already, 
parenthetically,  in  ver.  9.  This  method  of  recital  continues  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  with  a  single 
interruption,  ver.  17,  where  the  Poet  himself  throws  in  a  word.  [^There  is  no  necessity  for  supposing 
a  change  of  speaker  in  ver.  17. — W.  H.  H.]  Zwn  [^Jerusalem']  invites  all  who  pass  by,  ver.  12,  to 
convince  themselves  by  their  own  observation,  that  there  is  no  sorrow  like  unto  her  sorrow  ;  it  streamed 
as  fire  through  her  bones,  whilst  at  the  same  time  a  net  had  caught  her  feet,  ver.  13.  She  was  the  vic- 
tim of  sins  of  her  own  sowing,  in  consequence  of  which  she  had  been  helplessly  given  up  to  mighty  ene- 
mies, ver.  14  ;  her  heroes  had  proved  themselves  powerless,  for  her  enemies  had  been  called  together 
against  Judah  as  to  a  feast  at  the  wine-press,  ver.  15.  It  is  most  natural  that  Zion's  \_Jerusalem'  s] 
tears  should  flow  without  ceasing  for  such  calamities,  and  all  the  more  natural  since  after  the  catas- 
trophe all  hope  failed  her,  ver.  16.  By  way  of  confirmation  the  Poet  repeats,  in  his  own  words,  the 
thoughts  expressed  by  Zion  [^Jerusaleni]  in  the  preceding  context,  ver.  17  :  that  she  stretches  forth  her 
hands  for  help  in  vain,  that  the  Lord  had  called  together  all  her  foes  against  her,  so  that  she  now 
stood  in  the  midst  of  them  as  an  object  of  abhorrence.  Vers.  18-22,  Zion  [Jerusalem']  speaks  again. 
Once  more  she  repeats,  vers.  18,  19,  in  the  way  of  recapitulation,  the  acknowledgment  of  her  sin,  the 
invitation  to  consider  her  great  distress,  the  description  of  the  principal  items  of  the  same,  the  banish- 
ment of  her  efficient  youth,  the  defection  of  human  allies,  the  pitiable  death  by  starvation  of  her  venera- 
ble priests  and  elders.  The  last  three  verses  are  a  prayer.  May  the  Lord  regard  her  misery  ;  the 
hopeful  heart  is  broken  by  the  blows  of  the  angel  of  death,  ver.  20.  May  the  Lord  bring  upon  her 
malignant  enemies  such  a  day  of  vengeance  as  He  had  brought  upon  Zion  [Jerusalem'],  vers.  21,  22. 
The  last  two  lines  o/ ver.  22  are  a  final  exclamation  of  pain,  from  which  it  is  evident  that  thepetitiont 
offered  to  the  Lord  had  not  availed  to  allay  the  deeply-seated  agony  of  mind. 

I.   12. 

12  Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  pass  by?  behold,  and  see  if  there  be  any  sorrow 
like  unto  my  sorrow,  which  is  done  unto  me,  wherewith  the  Lord  hath  afflicted 
me  in  the  day  of  his  fierce  anger. 


52 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  12. — '^IT     '"^^U'SD-     This  phrase  is  found  in  ii.  15;    Jobxxi.  29;    Ps.  Ixxx.  13;    Ixxxix.  42  ;    Prov.  ix.  15.— 
'  ■."."        •*  :  T  LL" 

E'^'DN,  comp.  ver.  18.  These  words,  by  brevity  and  simplicity,  are  highly  poetical.— 17l_;^.  The  Pual.  conj.  occurs  only 
here ;  the  active  in  ver.  22 ;  ii.  20  ;  iii.  51 ;  Jer.  vi.  9  in  the  sense  of  racemari  [to  glean :  so  Jerome  renders  it  in  our  text, 
Wio  has  gleaned  we.— W.  II.  H.],  comp.  Jer.  xxxviii.  19.— HJin,  see  riU^l,  ver.  1.— '•n  DV2-  This  expression  is  found  only 
here  and  Is.  xiii.  13.    ISX  f  Hn  is  an  expression  common  with  Jeremiah,  iv.  8,  26  ;  xxv.  Z7,  38  ;  xxx.  24 ;  xlix.  37. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  12.  Zion  [Jerusalem]  addresses  herself 
now  to  men,  especially  to  all  "passers  by,"  ia 
order  to  gain  their  attention  and  stir  up  their 
sympathy  for  her  sufferings.  [This  address, 
according  to  Naegelsbach,  extends  to  ver.  16, 
but  in  fact,  to  the  end  of  ver.  19,  when  Jerusa- 
lem again  addresses  herself  to  Jehovah. — W.  H. 
H.]— Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  pass 
by  ?  The  Hebrew  is  very  difficult  and  hardly 
capable  of  a  satisfactory  explanation.  It  seems 
to  me  tliat  the  only  allowable  explanation  is  this: 
not  on  yourselves  (look),  but  look  and  see  whether 
anij  sorroiv  is  as  my  sorrow.  [See  crit.  note  below. 
There  is  a  difficulty  first  in  deciding  whether  the 
first  word  in  the  Hebrew  is  a  mere  particle  of 
wishing:  oh  if,  oh  that,  utinam,  would  that!  Or 
whether  it  is  the  particle  of  negation.  If  the  for- 
mer, then  we  may  adopt  Blayney's  translation, 
"  0  that  among  you,  all  ye  that  pass  by,  ye 
would  look  and  see,  if  there  be  a  sorrow  like  unto 
my  sorrow,"  etc.  Thus  our  text  is  a  call  for 
sympathy.  But  there  is  little  in  favor  of  this  in- 
terpretation. But  if  the  word  referred  to  is  a 
particle  of  negation,  then  there  are  other  diffi- 
culties: is  it  a  simple  negative,  or  a  negative  of 
interrogation?  In  either  case,  what  is  the 
meaning?  If  it  is  a  simple  negative,  we  may 
explain  it  in  several  ways.  1.  We  may,  as  Nae- 
gelsbach does,  connect  the  negative  with  the 
following  verbs.  Look  not  on  yourselves,  but  look 
and  see  if  there  be  any  sorrow  like  unto  my  sorrow. 
Or,  2.  We  may  translate  literally,  it  is  7iot  to  you, 
and  then  we  may  explain  it  in  two  ways :  either 
as  an  enunciation  of  the  fact  that  what  had  be- 
fallen her  had  not  befallen  them;  so  Hugh 
Broughton,  This  hath  not  befallen  you,  0  all  that 
pass  by  the  way.  Consider  ye  and  see  if,  etc.;  or 
it  may  be  taken  as  a  complaint  that  her  sorrows 
were  so  slighted — and  then  the  sense  is.  It  is  no- 
thiny  to  you,  i.  e.,  you  have  no  concern  in  it  or 
care  for  it.  Or,  3.  We  may  translate  it  in  the 
form  of  a  wish  or  prayer,  'let  not  that  befall  you 
that  hath  befallen  me.'  If  we  take  the  word 
interrogatively,  then  we  may  suppose  a  word 
omitted,  'Whether  or  no  shall  I  call  upon  you,' 
etc.;  or  we  may  render  it  as  the  English  version 
has  it,  and  in  favor  of  which  we  have  the  weight 
of  authority  on  the  part  of  translators  and  com- 
mentators :  Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  pass  by  ? 
West.  Annot.:  "Do  ye  make  light  of  mine  af- 
flictions? or,  do  ye  not  regard  them,  and  lay 
them  to  heart?  as  complaining  that  her  calami- 
ties were  so  slighted  by  others,  and  endeavoring 
to  move  them  to  some  commiseration  of  her.  See 
somewliat  the  like  form  of  speech  in  the  prayer  of 
tliose  luily  men  to  God,  Xcli.  ix.  •".2." — Behold 
and  see  if  there  be  any  sorrow^  like  unto 


my    sorrovr,    \vhich    is    done    unto    me. 

West.  Annot.:  "The  manner  of  persons  that  sit 
weeping  and  wailing,  as  wandering  outcasts,  by 
the  wayside,  is  wont  to  be  no  other  than  is  here 
deciphered,  in  a  proneness  to  acquaint  others 
with  their  calamitous  condition  (so  ver.  18),  and 
to  aggravate  them  in  relation  of  them,  as  being 
such  as  had  never  the  like  been  known  or  heard 
of  before.  See  iii.  1  ;  iv.  6." — Wherewith 
the  Lord  (Jeliovah)  hath  afflicted  me  in 
the  day  of  His  fierce  anger.  See  ver.  5. 
"By  the  transcendent  greatness  of  mine  af- 
fliction ye  may  easily  perceive  that  there  is  a 
special  hand  and  work  of  God  in  it.  See  Is.  x. 
5."  West.  Annot.— W.  H.  H.] 

DD^ 7N  Xn.  The  Sept.  reads  ol  npog  viiag,  where 
without  doubt  we  should  read  ol  -irp.  h.  Vulgate  : 
0  vos  omnes.  Chald.:  Adjuro  vos  omnes.  Syr., 
very  literally:  Nihilne  ad  vos  onmes  viatores? 
Arab.:   0  quotguot  viam  transilis  !     That  the  Sept. 

read  Xw  as  Nl7  is  very  probable.  There  is  no- 
thing that  should  prevent  our  pointing  it  so  to- 
day, if  any  thing  were  to  be  gained  by  it.     But 

O  (for  which  we  have  NO,  1  Sam.  xiv.  30  ;  Is. 
xlviii.  18  ;  Ixiii.  19)  never  stands  as  a  simple  in- 
terjection, but  is  a  conjunction,  and  always  re- 
quires a  verb  after  it.  We  could  indeed  supply 
such  a  verb  (Oh,  that  my  call  might  compel  your 
attention,  or  the  like);  but  it  is  difficult  to  sup- 
ply the  right  word,  and  we  cannot  conceive  why 
the  Poet  should  leave  the  reader  to  supply  it.    If 

we  read  N17   (which,  according  to  the  Masora, 

stands  35  times  for  iii,  see  Fuerst),  then  there 
are  two  ways  of  explaining  it.  Either  it  may  be 
understood  interrogatively:  nonne  ad  vos?  Then 
N'^pK  must  be  supplied,  as  Prov.  viii.  4  reads, 
K;^pvX  CK^'N  DP''7>?.-  But  there  K;^pK  is  ex- 
pressed. To  supply  it  here,  seems  to  me,  were 
equally  as  difficult  as  the  supply  of  a  word  after 

Xl7  would  necessarily  be.  Or,  Nw  mny  be  un- 
derstood as  a  negation.  In  this  sense  Aden 
Ezra   and  Rosenmueller  take  it,  whilst  they 

supply   the    words    "h  H^p^    It^X    jr'':n,     i.  e., 

hucusque  non  tctigit  vos,  quod  mihi  acridit ;  vus 
t/iii/'i  mala,  quiinta  nos  opprimunt,  nondum  estis  ex- 
pi-rti.  But  this  explanation  is  evidently  very  ar- 
bitrary. Uy  7N  is  to  be  regarded  as  dependent 
on  ^tO'Sn,  which  is  often  construed  with  /X,  Num. 

•    T 

xxi.  9;  Ps.  xxxiv.  6;  cii.  20;  Is.  xxii.  11,  etc. 
This  explanation  is  not,  it  is  true,  entirely  satis- 
factory. But  may  not  the  forced  construction 
arise  from  the  constraint  of  the  alphabetical  ar- 
rangement of  the    text  ?      [See   remark  above. 


CHAP.  I.   13-16.  58 


t<l7  here  is  the  same  as  K/lIi  see  Fuebst  and  1  i  mode  of  expressing  the  negation  «7,  which  haa 
Sam.  xiv  30.     The  omission  of  the  interrogation    here  all  the  force  of  a  substantive  put  interroga- 

t          tively,  as  it  is  in  the  common  version :  Is  it  no- 
n  is  accounted  for  by  the  desire  to  employ  7  as    thing?" W.  H.  H.] 

the  initial  letter.    Henderson  :  "  t^l^  is  a  strong  | 


I.  13-16. 

13  From  above  hath  he  sent  fire  into  my  bones,  and  it  prevaileth  against  them  :  he 
hath  spread  a  net  for  ray  feet ;  he  hath  turned  me  back ;  he  hath  made  me  desolate 

14  and  faint  all  the  day.  The  yoke  of  my  transgressions  is  bound  by  his  hand  ;  they 
are  wreathed,  and  come  up  upon  my  neck  ;  he  hath  made  my  strength  to  fall ;  the 
Lord  hath  delivered  me  into  their  hands,  from  whom  I  am  not  able  to  rise  up. 

15  The  Lord  hath  trodden  under  foot  all  my  mighty  men  in  the  midst  of  me :  he 
hath  called  an  assembly  against  me  to  crush  my  young  men :  the  Lord  hath  trod- 

16  den  the  virgin,  the  daughter  of  Judah,  as  in  a  wine-press.  For  these  things  I 
weep ;  mine  eye,  mine  eye  runneth  down  with  water,  because  the  comforter  that 
should  relieve  my  soul  is  far  from  me ;  my  children  are  desolate,  because  the 
enemy  prevailed. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  13.— OnD    occurs  often  in  Jeremiah:  xvii.  12,  etc.;  DiT^D,  xxv.  30.— JlinV V,  Jer.  viii.  1,  and  elsewhere.— 

T  T  •  T  -: 

ni'l'^'l.    The  word  is  obscure.    It  is  the  Imp.  Kal.  of  mi-    But  mi  signifies  to  tread  upon,  gmsem.    The  subject  caa 

TV:-  T  T  T  T 

be  tyx,  since  this  word  is  also  used  as  a  masculine  (Dii  7   U'X,  Ps.  civ.  4).    The  singular  suflBx  713—  refers  to  TIIDV  V, 

since  the  bones  are  regarded  as  constituting  one  body.  See  Naegelsb.  Gr.,  ?105,  7,  rem.  2.  We  translate,  thererefore,  and 
it  subdued  them.    [Fuebst  :  n'1  for  '•"l"'!,  and  he  caused  it  (,the  fire)  to  become  master.    Blatney  translates,  and  hath  caused 

it  to  penetrate  into  my  bones,  and  says,  "  This  is  obviously  the  right  construction,  and  it  is  that  which  is  approved  by  the 
LXX."  But  the  Sept.  uses  the  verb  /caT^yayei/,— and  obviously  neither  that  verb  nor  the  Hebrew  means  to  penetrate.  All 
the  other  versions  use  the  word  '  prevail,'  '  subdue,'  or  '  govern,'  except  Boothrqyd,  who  blindly  follows  Blatney. — W.  II.  H.] 
mi,  Jer.  V.  31.    Comp.  Lev.  xxv.  43,  4G,  53.— tJ?"12.    See  ver.  10.    P^/l  occurs  not  again  in  Lamentations  and  not  at  all 

T  T  -  T 

in  Jeremiah.— ['J^'tJ^n.  The  Hiphil  form,  caused  me  to  turn.  This  favors  the  idea  of  the  net  as  the  instrument  of  prevent- 
ing escape  ;   see  below.— W.  H.  H.J—nOOlE'-    See  ?''DDiK',  ver.  4.— HH.    This  word  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah.    It  is 

T    ••  I       •  ■•  TT 

fcund,  besides  here,  v.  17 ;  Lev.  xv.  33 ;  xx.  18  ;  Is.  xxx.  22. 

Ver.  1*  — npE'J  is  air.  \ey.  The  root  10,  which  reappears  in  Ip-^,  ligare  (Gen.  xxii.  9),  l^-N,  IJ'N,  Aram.  IJX, 
ligavit  (see  TTl  JS,  nodus,  Is.  Iviii.  6)  cat-ena,  kettle  (observe  the  change  of  the  aspirate  to  the  sibilant,  comp.  Js  and  sus,  uAij 
and  silva,  vnep  and  super,  iAs  and  sal,  Jl  jy  and  J"1X,  Ges.  Thes.,  p.  1318),  seems  to  have  the  signification  of  binding,  tieing. 
EWALD  conjectures  that  Iptl*  may  have  been  the  common  technical  term  for  harnessing.— ^i\  frequent  in  Jeremiah  :  ii. 
20  ;  V.  5  ;  xxviii.  2,  4, 11,  14  ;  xxx.  8.  In  ^7^^  and  H^'  the  Poet  seems  to  aim  at  a  play  upon  words.— j;^;^  occurs  only 
vers.  5, 14,  22  ;  Jer.  v.  6.— The  Hithpahel  JljlE^H  only  here ;  elsewhere  only  the  Pual,  Job  xl.  7.  [Boothroy'd,  translating 
>i!p  as  if  it  were  iSj^,  is  compelled  to  translate  UljltJ?"  in  the  sing.,  His  yoke  He  hath  twisted  on  my  neck.— For  a  similar 
use  of  nj^  with  ^^',  in  the  sense  of  rising  above  the  object  indicated,  see  Dent,  xxviii.  43.— W.  H.  H.J- Vu/Dn-  Kal  fre- 
quent in  Jeremiah;  Hiph.,  labare  fecit,  Jer.  xviii.  15  ;  Hoph.  Jer.  xviii.  23.— "T^.  Construction  as  in  Jer.  ii.  8.  See  my 
Gr.,  1 65,  2,  /.    ["A  noun  is  sometimes  put  in  the  construct  before  a  succeeding  clause  with  which  it  is  already  connected,"— 

"  particularly  when  the  relation  is  itself  omitted,  nSi:?r\-T'3,  by  the  hand  of  him  whom  thou  wilt  send"  (Green's  Gr.). 

T   :    •  : 

This  construction  renders  it  necessary  to  take  Q^p  in  a  transitive  sense  ;  or  else  to  introduce  a  word  besides  the  relative;  so 

E.  v.:  from  whom  lam  not  able  to  rise  up.  Noyes  :  against  whom  I  cannot  stand  up.  Whom  I  cannot  withstand  or  resist. 
This  seems  to  be  the  sense,  and  is  not  foreign  to  the  use  of  Dip.  — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  15.— nbp-    Piel  only  here:  Kal,  Ps.  cxix.  118  :  Pual,  Job  xxviii.  16,  17.— ■)''3X,  often  in  Jeremiah,  viii.  16;  xlvi. 

15;  xlvii.  3  ;  1.  11.    In  Lam.  only  here.— IJ^io   Nip,  Lev.  xxiii.  4.    See  ver.  4.    Jeremiah  generally  uses  the  noun  in  the 

tI  t 

sense  of  tempusflnum  [and  that  is  its  meaning  here.  Owen  :  He  hath  brought  on  me  the  fixed  time  to  destroy  my  young  men.— 
W.  H.  H.]— 'T^ini  "^^yI-  ^  peculiar  expression,  yet  see  Jer.  11.  22.— ^7  j-\J  Ty\.  A  peculiar  use  of  S  [it  seems  to  mean 
with  relation  to,  as  to,  quoad.— W.  H.  H.].  nj,  not  in  Jeremiah,  yet  he  uses  111  of  the  treaders  of  the  wine-press,  xxv.  30 ; 
xlviii.  33;  Ii.  33.— j^3  il7in3,  in  Jeremiah  once,  of  the  Egyptians,  xlvi.  11,  and  once  in  the  connection  ''BV  nS  r\Sin3, 
xiv.  17  ;  comp.  xviii.  13  ;  xxxi.  4,  21.    In  Lam.,  besides  here,  only  in  ii.  13,  comp.  ii.  10.  ' 

Ver.  16.— n'3i3  (see  pflb,  Is.  xvii.  6  and  elsewhere ;  Olsh.,  §  177,  6)  occurs  only  here.  Yet  Jeremiah  uses  Ti23,  xli. 
<;.  and  n33p,  xxxi.  15  :  in  the  last  place  in  connection  with  SjT,  as  here  :  elsewhere  T\22  is  constructed  with  ace.  viii.  23, 


54 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


S,  xxiJ- 10,  or  03D.  x'"- 17-    [Gbebn,  <?r.,  §209, 1,  and  Pauli,  Anal.,  p.  261,  attribute  the  form  to  the  fact  that  '  was  ori 

ginally  the  last  radical  of  the  verb.  Pauli,  in  his  Key.  p.  63,  n,  informs  us  that  "  the  Prophet  uses  the  feminine  gender  for 
the  purpose  of  expressing  meekness  and  the  intensity  of  his  grief"  A  ratlier  reraarlcable  instance  of  a  rule  made  to  meet  a 
supposed  case.  Fortunately  we  are  not  obliged  to  allow  the  Prophet  to  vinsex  himself,  since  not  the  Prophet  himself,  but  the 
ideal  and  feminine  Jerusalem  is  the  speaker.— The  verb,  properly  intransitive,  is  used  in  a  transitive  sense  :  my  eye  runs 

down  water.    A  peculiar  Hebrew  idiom  to  express  abundance,  Joel  iv.  18,  370   ilJD'^n,  the  hills  shall  run  milk.    See 

T  T  T  .    ~  : 

Green's  Gr.—W.  H.  U.]— The  part.  DPi'D  Jeremiah  does  uot  use.— D'OpiE?,  see  ver  i  — 13J  is  found  Jer.  ix.  2. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  13-16  contain  a  particular  account  of 
the  various  sufiFerings  endured,  together  with 
their  eflBcient  causes. 

Ver.  13.  The  sufferings  [of  the  city]  appear 
under  two  images.  The  first  image  is  derived 
from  the  fire  that  falls  from  Heaven  (Gen.  xix. 
24;  Deut.  xxix.  23 ;  Ps.  xi.  6).  Heavenly  fire 
burns  more  fiercely  than  earthly ;  it  cannot  be 
quenched.  [The  image  of  fire  is  suggested  by 
the  last  words  of  the  preceding  verse,  "in  the 
day  of  his  fierce  anger,"  which  may  be  rendered 
in  the  day  of  His  glowing  or  burning  anger.  So 
Calvin,  in  die  excandescentise  irse  suse. — From 
above,  lit.,  from  on  high.  Calvin:  "the  ex- 
pression is  emphatical,  for  the  Prophet  means 
that  it  was  no  common  or  human  burning;  be- 
cause what  is  ascribed  to  God  exceeds  what  is 
human  or  earthly." — Hath  he  sent  fire  into 
my  bones.  Calvin:  ''They  who  interpret 
bones  of  fortified  places,  weaken  the  meaning  of 
the  Prophet.  I  take  bones  in  their  proper  sense, 
as  though  it  were  said,  that  God's  fire  had  pene- 
trated into  the  inmost  parts.  This  way  of  speak- 
ing often  occurs  in  Scripture. — David  deplored 
that  his  bones  were  vexed  or  troubled,  Ps.  vi.  2. 
And  Hezekiah  said  in  his  song,  "As  a  lion  he 
hath  broken  my  bones,"  Is.  xxxviii.  13." — W. 
H.  H.]— And  it  prevaileth  against  them. 
Atid  it  hath  subdued  them,  or  got  the  better  of 
them.  [Calvin:  "The  Prophet  says  that  fire 
had  been  sent  by  God,  ivhich  ruled  in  his  hones, — 
that  is,  which  not  only  burnt  the  skin  and  the 
flesh,  but  also  consumed  the  bones."  The  Cran- 
MEK  and  Bishops'  Bibles  translate  very  freely, 
but  preserve  the  sense,  "  From  above  hath  He 
sent  down  fire  into  my  bones,  and  it  burneth  them 
cruelly.''' — W.  H.  H.] — The  second  image  is  de- 
rived from  the  hunter,  who  lays  nets  for  the  wild 
beast. — He  hath  spread  a  net  for  my  feet. 
[Calvin:  "  There  is  another  similitude  added, 
that  God  had  spread  a  net  before  her  feet, — and 
thus  He  had  taken  away  every  means  of  escape. 
She  had  been  ensnared  by  God's  judgments,  so 
that  she  was  bound  over  to  ruin,  as  though  she 
had  fallen  into  toils  or  snares."] — He  hath 
turned  me  back.  See  ver.  8.  This  and  the 
two  following  clauses  contain  ideas  by  means  of 
which  the  poet  seems  to  puss  over  from  the  image 
to  the  reality.  [But  is  not  this  clause  to  be  ex- 
plained by  the  metaphor  of  the  net,  by  which, 
when  she  sought  to  escape,  she  was  turned 
back?  So  Calvin  understands  it:  "She  had 
been  turned  back  by  the  nets  of  God."  Or  we 
may  explain  it  consistently  with  the  metaphor, 
as  the  Westminster  Annotations  ilo  :  "Cast 
me  down  backward  ;  thrown  me  down  and  I  lid 
me  on  my  back."' — He  hath  made  me  deso- 
late, and  faint  all  the  day  :  or,  better,  i-vr- 
rowful  all  the  day :  so  Naegelsbacu  and  Calvin. 


Cranmer's  B.  and  Bishops'  B.  both  render  it, 
"  He  hath  made  me  desolate,  so  thai  1  must  ever 
be  mourning."  Calvin  :  "  It  is  stated  in  the 
third  place,  that  she  was  desolate  all  the  day,  so 
that  she  sorrowed  perpetually." — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  14.  A  third  metaphor,  which  indicates 
the  cause  of  the  ruin  which  has  befallen  Zion 
[Jerusalem]. — The  yoke  of  my  transgres- 
sions is  bound  by  His  hand,  to  His  hand. 
Zion  [Jerusalem]  may  not  be  relieved  from  her 
guilt,  but  rather  it  is  tied  fast  upon  her  as  a 
yoke.  And  truly  this  is  done  by  God's  hand. 
But  what  God  binds,  that  He  holds  fast;  no 
mortal  power  can  loosen  it  [Henderson:  "The 
next  metaphor  is  taken  from  agricultural  life. 
As  the  hand  of  the  ploughman  firmly  binds  the 
yoke  on  the  neck  of  the  ox,  so  inseparably  had 
the  punishment  of  the  iniquities  of  Jerusalem 
been  connected  with  her  rebellious  conduct  to- 
wards Jehovah." — There  is  some  uncertainty  as 
to  the  verb  in  this  clause.  In  the  Keri  or  Maso- 
retic  reading  and  in  several  MSS.  and  printed 
editions  of  the  Bible,  the  verb  used  means  to  be 
watched:  and  the  verb  is  taken  in  the  sense  of 
watching  in  the  Sept.,  Syr.  and  Vulgate,  and  the 
old  versions  generally.  It  is  singular  that  Nae- 
GELSBACH  docs  not  refer  to  this  reading,  since  it 
is  the  one  adopted  in  the  text  of  the  German 
Bible.  Dr.  Blayney  and  the  Rev.  John  Owen, 
insist  that  this  is  the  correct  reading.  All  the 
versions  and  translators  adopting  this  reading, 
except  the  Vulgate,  take  the  word  rendered  yoke 
not  as  a  noun,  but  as  a  preposition.  Mr.  Owen 
translates  thus:  He  katn  watched  over  my  trans- 
gressions, by  His  hand  they  are  twined.  This  gives 
a  good  sense.  "  To  '  watch  over  transgressions,' 
is  similar  to  'watch  upon  (or  over)  the  evil '  in 
Dan.  ix.  14;  it  is  to  watch  over  them  in  order  to 
punish  them"  (J.  Owen).  But  the  grammatical 
objections  to  this  rendering  are  nearly  insupera- 
ble. See  Crit.  Note  below. — Another  point  of  in- 
terest is  whether  we  should  translate  by  His 
Hand,  or  in,  or  to  His  hand.  The  former  is  adopt- 
ed by  Naegelsbach,  Henderson  and  Booth- 
ROYD,  and  has  the  sanction  of  the  English  Ver- 
sion. The  latter  in  His  ha7id,  is  supported  by 
Sept.,  Vulg.,  Bishops'  Bible,  Calvin,  Blayney, 
and  No  YES,  and  is  recommended  by  the  sense, 
and  also  best  expresses  the  primitive  sense  of  the 
preposition.  The  Bishops'  Bible  reads,  ^/^eyfA^ 
of  my  transgressions  is  bound  fast  to  His  hand;  and 
appends  this  note,  "The  bondage  through  sin  is 
mo.st  grievous,  which  therefore  is  called  the  yoke 
of  sins,  fastened  in  or  to  God's  hand  because  by 
no  means  it  can  be  shaken  off  or  remitted,  but 
only  of  God's  grace  and  mercy."  Noyes:  "  T^Ae 
yoke  of  my  transgressions  is  fastened  in  His  hand. 
A  metaphor  drawn  from  the  practice  of  a  hus- 
bandman, who,  after  fastening  the  yoke  upon  the 
cattle,  keeps  the  cords  wound  round  his  hand. 
So  she  says  the  yoke  of  her  transgressions,  i.  e., 
the  consequences   of  them,  is  fastened  upon  her 


CHAP.   1.   18-16. 


neck,  and  the  cords  connected  with  it  wound 
round  the  hand  of  God,  so  that  she  could  not 
throw  it  off."  Calvin  has  a  long  note  to  the 
eame  effect. — W.  H.  H.]. — They  are  wreathed 

and,  or,  [leaving  out  the  conjunction  which    is 
not  in  the  original]  they  come  up — rise  up  above 
— upon  my  neck.     Comp.  Ps.  xxxviii.  5.     As 
if  the  yoke  were  fastened  by  many  cords,  inter- 
woven together,  and  forming,  as  it  were,  a  heap 
or  elevation  upon  the  neck.     The  verbs  being  in 
ihe  plural  must  have  for  their  subject  the  word 
"transgressions,"  hence  it  is  evident  that  he  re- 
garded the    sins  themselves  as  the  cords  which 
fastened  the  yoke  on  the  neck.     And  very  cer- 
tainly sins  constitute  the  bond  between  the  guilty 
one  and  his  guilt.     [Wordswoeth  :   "  Mt/  sins  are 
twined  together,  so  as  to  fasten  the  yoke  upon  my 
neck.     Comp.  Deut.   xxviii.  48.     The  reason  of 
this  comparison  is  that  sins  become  punishments 
[peccati  poena  peccatum),  and  are  a  sore  burden, 
too  heavy  for  the  sinner  to   bear  (Ps.  xxxviii. 
4)."     Hendekson:   "To  express  more   forcibly 
the  complicated  character  of  the  iniquities  of  the 
Jews  as  entailing  punishment   upon  them,  they 
are  said  to  entwine  or  interweave  themselves,  the  idea 
being  probably  borrowed  from  the  intertwining 
of  withes  for  the  purpose  of  binding  the  yoke 
with  them."     The  expression,  they  come  up  upon 
my  neck    (variously  rendered,  they  go   over   my 
neck  (Broughton),  come  up  about  my  neck  (Bish. 
Bible),  rise  up  on  my  neck  (Hendekson),  are  laid 
upon  my  neck  (Notes),  may  express  the  idea  of  a 
burden   in  addition   to  that  of  a  yoke,  that  the 
sins  wreathe  themselves  into  a  yoke  that  is  heavy 
and  burdensome  on  the  neck,  "a  yoke  which  is 
insupportable"  (Wordsworth,  Notes), — or  the 
idea   may  be,  that  the  yoke  is   so  wreathed  to- 
gether and  knotted   as  it   were  upon  the  neck, 
that  the  head  cannot  be  withdrawn  from  it.    The 
last  seems  to  be  Naegelsbach's  idea.     So  Cal- 
vin,  "we  ought  to  bear  in  mind  the  two  clauses 
— that  God's  hand  held  the  yoke  tied,  and  also 
that  the   yoke  was  bound  around  the  neck  of 
Jerusalem,  *   *    *  it  is  tied,   and  so  fastened, 
that  it  cannot  be  shaken  off."     So  also  Brough- 
ton, who  translates,  they  plat  themselves;   they  go 
over   my   neck,  and  in    a  treatise  on  "  Jeremie's 
Lamentations"  explains  this  passage  thus:   ^'■The 
yoke  of  their  sin  was  platted  over  their  head.     The 
state  in  Jeremie's  time  was  so  entangled  with 
the   idolatry   of  the  Egyptians  and  their  other 
friends,  that  they  could  not  get  their  head  out  of 
it." — W.H.H.]   In  what  follows  the  Poet  as  inver. 
13,  drops  the  metaphorical  style  for  the  literal. — 
He  hath  made  my  strength  to  fall.     He  has 
broken  my  strength.      [The  primitive  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  verb  suggests  the  idea  of  one  totter- 
ing to  and  fro,  staggering  from  weakness   (see 
Is.  V.   27),  as,  in  the   present  instance,  under  a 
heavy  yoke.     Our  E.  V.  vainly   strives    to  pre- 
serve this  idea  in  a  phrase  that  is  awkward  and 
needs  explanation,   ''He  has  made  my  strength  to 
fall.''  Blayney  comes  nearer  the  primitive  mean- 
ing of  the  verb  by  using  the   word  ''stumble" 
instead    of     "fall,"    hath   caused   my    strength    to 
stumble.     But  it  is  doubtful  if  the  verb,  in  the 
form  in  which  it  is  used,  expresses  more  than  the 
idea  of  weakening  or  exhausting  the   strength. 
Owen:   "He  hath  weakened  my  strength."  Cal- 
vin;;    corruere  fecit  [vel,  debiiitavit)  robur    meuin. 


Bishops'  Bible  and  Henderson:  "He  hath 
caused  my  strength  to  fail." — W.  H.  H  ] — The 
Lord  hath  delivered  me  into  their  hands, 
from  whom  I  am  not  able  to  rise  up,  whom 

I  cannot  resist. — The  Lord,  Adonai.  Tiiis  name, 
Adonai,  never  occurs  alone  in  the  prophecies  of 
Jeremiah,  but  is  always  followed  by  Jehorah  (and 
that,  too,  according  to  the  Masoretic  punctuation 
•^^n'  'P^.)>  i-  6;  ii.  19,  22;  iv.  10;  vii.  20;  xiv. 
18;  xliv.  26,  xlix.  5;  1.  31.  But  in  the  Lamen- 
tations, Adonai  is  never  followed  by  Jehovah,  and 
stands  alone  in  fourteen  places,  i.  14,  15  twice; 
ii.  1,  2,  5,  7,  18,  19,  20;  iii.  31.  36,  37,  58  [see 
Introduction,  Add.  Rem.,  p.  32.  If  Adonai  is 
the  correct  reading,  its  significance  is  thus  ex- 
plained by  Wordsworth:  "The  prophet  appears 
thus  to  intimate  in  the  Lamentations,  that  now,  in 
her  captivity  and  humiliation,  Jerusalem  felt  the 
lordship  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel ;  but  by  rea- 
son of  her  sins,  no  longer  felt  that  lordship  to  be 
exercised  by  Him  as  Jehovah,  i.  e.,  as  the  God  of 
His  covenanted  people,  to  protect  them.  A  simi- 
lar feeling  made  Solomon  abstain  in  Ecclesiastes 
from  the  use  of  the  name  Jehovah  altogether."] 
[The  argument  of  Owen  for  reading  ^ptyJ  in- 
stead of  "'pli'J,  that  where  all  the  versions  agree, 
there  is  a  strong  presumption  that  they  are 
right,  is  offset  by  the  difficulty  of  construction 
in   that   case   and   the   necessity  it   involves  of 

changing  7^'  yoke  into  ?^  upon  in  the  first  clause, 
and  the  verb  1/^  they  rise  up  into  the  noun  and 
pronoun  Tihp  his  yoke  in  the  third  clause.  The 
difficulties  of  construction  are  evident  in  the 
translations  of  Blayney  and  Owen,  the  two  ad- 
vocates for  this  reading;  Blayney  gives  the  verb 
in  the  singular  a  plural  noun  for  its  subject,  7Hy 
transgressions  have  been  closely  watched;  and  Owen 
renders  the  verb,  which  is  confessedly  a  passive 
verb  and  so  rendered  by  the  Sept.  and  all  the  old 
versions  except  the  Vulgate,  which  Owen  him- 
self says  "hardly  gives  any  meaning,"  in  an  ac- 
tive sense,  He  hath  watched  over  my  transgressions 
A  reading  involving  three  changes  in  the  Maso- 
retic points,  and  even  then  incapable  of  correct 
grammatical  construction,  surely  ought  to  be  re- 
jected.—W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  15  The  Lord  hath  trodden  under 
foot. — Hath  cast  away,  or  rejected  [de.spised  or 
7nade  despicable — W.  H.  H.].  This  verse  begins 
in  the  literal  style  of  speaking,  and  ends  in  the 
metaphorical.  [If  our  English  version  is  to  be 
retained,  trodden  underfoot,  then  the  metaphor  is 
begun  in  the  first  clause,  and  beautifully  de- 
veloped as  the  verse  proceeds.  But  the  E.  V. 
cannot  be  sustained ,  see  Critical  Note  below. — 
W.  H.  H.]  All  my  mighty  xaexi.,~Heroes, 
Ger.  Helden  [Fuerst:  great  men^- — In  the  midst 
of  me;  in  meiner  Mitte.  [Calvin.  "She  says, 
in  the  midst  of  me.  And  this  ought  to  be  observed , 
for  if  they  had  fallen  on  the  field  of  battle,  if 
they  had  been  taken  in  the  fields  by  their  ene- 
mies, such  a  thing  would  not  have  been  so  griev- 
ous; but  that  they  had  thus  been  laid  prostrate" 
— or  rather,  deprived  of  strength  to  resist  and 
thus  rendered  contemptible, — "  in  the  very  bosoiu 
of  the  city,  was  indeed  a  token  of  veng'^auce 
from  above." — He  hath  called  an  assembly 


56 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


against  me — He  has  proclaimed  a  solemn  feast  [a 
set  time. — W.  H.  H.]  against  me. — to  crush  my 
young  men, — to  break  in  pieces  my  young  men.  As 
to  a  festive  gathering  the  Lord  calls  her  enemies 
to  Jerusalem.  The  purpose  of  this  festive  gather- 
ing is  indicated  in  a  general  way  by  the  words 
against  me;  but  is  more  clearly  indicated  by  the 
words  to  crtish  or  break  in  pieices  my  young  men.  In 
this  expression  is  already  shadowed  forth  the 
following  metaphor;  for  the  wine-press  breaks 
to  pieces,  crushes  the  berries.  [Wordsworth: 
"An  oxymoron;  the  term  to  call  an  assembly  sig- 
nifies the  gathering  of  a  holy  convocation  for 
fe.«tal  rejoicing,  or  other  religious  purposes.  But 
now  the  religious  festival  of  Jerusalem  hath 
ceased  (see  ver.  4),  and  God  has  called  an  assem- 
bly of  enemies  to  crush  her.  Compare  the  ex- 
pression to  sanctify  war,  or  consecrate  an  army 
against  a  city.  See  on  Isa.  xiii.  3;  Jer.  vi.  4; 
li.  27,  28;  Joel  iii.  9." — Though  it  may  impair 
a  beautiful  figure,  it  seems  better  to  take  "I^IQ 
in  its  usual  meaning  of  a  set  time.  God  appointed 
the  time,  as  for  a  great  solemnity,  and  it  came 
according  to  His   appointment  the  time  to  crush 

the  young  men. — W.  H.  H.] 'The  Lord  hath 

trodden  the  virgin,  the  daughter  of  Judah, 
as  in  a  ■wine-press. — The  Lord  trod  the  ivine- 
piress  of  the  virgin  Judah's  daughter.  We  find  sub- 
stantially the  same  image  used,  Joel  iv.  13;  Isa. 
Ixiii.  2,  3;  llev.  xiv.  18-20;  xix.  15.  [Owen: 
The  tvine-press  has  the  Lord  trodden  as  to  the  virgin, 
the  daughter  of  Judah.'\ 

nbo.  The  meaning  is  tollere,  I'dpfen  [to  lift  up, 
to  remove  a  thing  from  its  place,  to  cast  it  away, 
and  tlius  to  treat  it  with  contempt,  or  to  destroy 
it,  as  the  case  may  be.  The  old  lexicographers, 
tracing  a  remote  analogy  between  this  verb  and 

?bD,  gave  to  it  the  sense  of  treading  down,  or 
treading  under  foot,  which  is  adopted  here  by  E. 
v.,  Broughton,  Calvin,  Blayney,  Boothroyd 
and  Noyes  ;  but  has  not  the  sanction  of  the  an- 
cient versions.  Cranmer  and  Bishops'  Bible 
translate  it  hath  destroyed.  Henderson  :  hath 
cast  away.  So  Naegelsbach  :  verworfen  hat :  so 
also  the  Sept.,  £^>]pev,  and  the  Vulg.,  abstulit.  So 
also  Noyes  in  Ps.  cxix.  118,  "Thou  easiest  off 
all  who  depart  from  Thy  laws;"  which  Alex- 
ander translates,  "Thou  despisest  all  those  stray- 
ing from  Thy  statutes,"  in  which  he  agrees  with 
the  Sept.,  E^ov(hi^uaai:,  and  with  the  Vulg.,  spre- 
visii.  This  sense,  "  Thou  hast  despised,"  is  very 
suitable  to  our  text.  It  is  still  better  to  give  the 
Piel  the  force  of  Hiphil,  Thou  hast  caused  to  be 
despised,  or  rendered  despicable,  "my  mighty 
men  in  the  midst  of  me."  See  Calvin's  note 
above  on  the  words  "m  the  midst  of  me,"  and  ob- 
serve how  admirably  then  the  first  clause  of  this 
verse  follows  the  last  clause  of  the  preceding 
verse  :  She  is  given  up  into  the  hands  of  those 
she  cannot  resist,  and  thus  her  mighty  men  in  the 
midst  of  her  are  made  objects  of  contempt.  On 
the  other  hand,  to  translate  as  Naegelsbach, 
FuERST  and  Henderson,  "The  Lord  has  re- 
jected, or  cast  away,  all  my  mighty  men  in  the 
midst  of  me,"  is  awkward  and  not  very  intelli- 
gible.—W.  H.  H.] 

Vur.  10.  For  these  things  I  weep. — This 
refers  back    to  ver.  12.     Ziuu    [Jerusalem]   as- 


serted in  ver.  12  that  no  sorrow  was  like  her 
sorrow.  The  correctness  of  this  assertion  is  es- 
tablished, vers.  13-15,  by  matters  of  fact.  Zion 
[Jerusalem]  then,  in  ver.  16,  refers  in  th*;  words 
for  these  things  1  weep,  back  to  the  foregoing  as- 
sertion, whilst  she  repeats  the  same  with  em- 
phasis though  in  other  words.  —  Mine  eye, 
mine  eye.  The  emphatic  repetition  of  the  same 
word  is  not  infrequent  with  Jeremiah;  iv.  19, 
vi.  14;  viii.  11;  xxiii.  25. — Runneth  down 
w^ith  water.  See  iii.  48;  Jer.  ix.  17  ;  xiii.  17; 
xiv.  17. — Because  the  comforter.  See  ver. 
2. — that  should  relieve  (marg.,  bring  back) 
my  soul, — the  Reviver  of  my  soul:  ?ee  at  ver. 
1 1  [the  Restorer  of  my  soul,  more  nearly  expres- 
ses the  original,  which  is  purposely  generic  and 
pregnant. — W.  H.  H.]. — Is  far  from  me.  [Five 
times  in  this  poem  we  have  an  allusion  to  an 
absent  comforter;  vers.  2,  9,  16,  17,  21.  That 
there  is  an  allusion  to  God  the  Holy  Ghost 
seems  evident.  The  addition  of  the  words 
"Restorer  of  my  soul,"  reminding  us  of  Ps. 
xxiii.  8,  makes  this  plain.  Diodati  :  "  The  com- 
forter, namely,  God  by  His  Holy  Spirit."  It  was 
the  absence  of  God  who  comforts  His  people  by 
His  word  and  Spirit,  that  Jerusalem  deplored, 
and  she  might  have  expressed  her  grief  in  the 
words  of  the  Psalmist,  "  Why  standest  Thou  afar 
oil'.  0  Jehovah  ?  Why  hidest  Thou  Thyself  in 
times  of  trouble  (x.  1)?"  Noyes  betrays  the 
theologicum  odium  in  his  version,  violating  the 
grammar  and  changing  the  text,  to  destroy  any 
possible  reference  to  a  Divine  personality,  '■'Far 
from  me  are  they  that  should  comfort  me,  that  should 
restore  my  strength."  We  may  translate  DflJO  the 
Cdinfor/i'r,  or  a  comfurtcr.  the  one  comforting,  one 
that  comforts,  but  cannot  make  plurals  of  it  and 
y^'O,  or  get  the  idea  of  "strength  "  out  of  C'pJ. 
— W.  H.  H.] — My  children  are  become  deso- 
late,— perished,  lit.,  have  become  perishing ;  same 
word  as  is  used  in  ver.  4,  "her  gates  are  deso- 
late" ==  destroyed. — W.  H.  H.]— Because  the 
enemy  prevailed — prevails  [or  has  become  more 
powerful.  Some  take  this  as  if  an  explanation  of 
the  preceding, — that  Jerusalem  is  comfortless  be- 
cause the  children,  who  should  comfort  her,  are 
themselves  helpless.  But  this  is  too  broad  a  dis- 
tinction between  Jerusalem  and  her  children,  and 
destroys  the  unity  of  the  ideal  image  of  the  mourn- 
ing daughter  of  Jerusalem.  We  are  to  take  the 
last  words  as  stating  a  result,  rather  than  a  cause 
of  the  helpless  Jerusalem,  forsaken  of  her  com- 
forter, who  could  restore  her  life,  and  therefore 
unable  to  prevent  her  children  from  perishing  un- 
der the  superior  power  of  the  enemy. — W.  H.  H.] 
\^X^.  ^^^^..-  Mineeye,mineeye.  Blayney,  Booth- 
royd and  Noyes  omit  the  repetition  on  the  au- 
thority Q(f  the  ancient  versions  and  some  Hebrew 
MSS.  All  the  other  modern  versions  retain  it; 
even  the  Douay  departs  from  the  Vulgate  so  far 
as  to  read  "my  eyes."  We  cannot  agree  with 
Blayney  that  the  repetition  incumbers  the  me~ 
tre.  It  is  more  difficult  to  account  for  the  repe- 
tition in  so  many  MSS.  than  for  its  omission  in 
a  very  few.  Blayney  feels  this,  when  he  taxes 
his  ingenuity  by  suggesting  that  "perhaps  ^JN 
may  originally  have  followed  n'I)13,  and  have 
been  thus  the  ground  of   the  transcriber's  mis- 


CHAP.  I.  17. 


take."  Owen,  the  editor  of  Calvin,  says: 
"Though  the  Sept.  and  Vulg.  do  not  repeat  the 
'eye,'  yet  the  Targ.  has  'my  two  eyes'  "  [so  the 
German,  meine  beiden  Augen]  "  and  the  Syr. 
'mine  eyes.'  "     All  the  ancient  versions,  there- 


fore, do  not  omit  the  second  'J'J;*,  as  has  been 
asserted.  Most  of  the  Heb.  MSS.  contain  it: 
and  it  is  very  emphatic,  highly  poetical,  and 
"quite  in  the  style  of  Jeremiah." — W.  H.  H.] 


I.  17. 

17  Zion  spreadeth  forth  her  hands,  and  there  is  none  to  comfort  her :  the  Lord 
hath  commanded  concerning  Jacob,  that  his  adversaries  should  be  round  about 
him :  Jerusalem  is  as  a  menstruous  woman  among  them. 


TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 
Ver.  17. — nt!''^3.    The  construction  of  Piel  with  3  follows  the  analogy  of  the  Hiphil,  then  too  Piel  may  have  a  direct 

causative  signification.  See  my  Gr..  ^18,  III.,  2,  3;  §69,  1,  rem.  2.  The  Hiphil  is  found  so  construed  in  Jer.  xviii.  16.  See 
Ps.  .\xii.  8  :  .Tob  xvi.  10.  ["A.s  tlie  oljjeit  of  an  action  may,  in  certain  cases,  be  regarded  as  tlie  instrument  with  which  it  is 
performed,  some  transitive  verbs  admit  a  construction   with    3,    with,"  (Green's  6r.,  §272,  2,  6)       See  Judg.  iii.  27, 

'ISIK'jl    ypn'1. — n'TS.     Blatney  :  "Five  MSS.  read  rn^3,  iind  the  Roman  edition  of  the  LXX.  represents  x^'P"^  avTTjs 

in  the  singular  ;  but  the  Alexand.  and  Complut.  editions  read  xeipa?-" — W.  H.  H.]— ^pj;'!.     *7  here  is  not  a  sign  of  the 

dative,  but  a  preposition  of  place.  [Chau).eus  explains,  as  quoted  by  Rosenmueller,  '  Jeliovah  imposed  on  the  house  of  Ja- 
«oh  the  commandments  and  law,  that  they  should  keep  them ;  but  they  themselves  transgressed  the  decree  of  His  word.'     It 

is  impossible  to  crowd  so  much  meaning  into  three  words.    The   7  obviously  does  not  indicate  a  commandment  given  to 

Jacob,  but  a  commandment  given  concerning  Jacob.    See  H  7ir\3  7,  ver.  15. — The  ancient  versions  which  give  DTJ,  ver.  8, 

-        :    •  T    • 

the  idea  of  wandering,  all  agree  that  mj  in  this  verse  has  the  sense  of  uncleantiess.    Yet  Owen  would  insist  on  translating 

T  ■ 

it  here  "  a  wanderer  "  or  fugitive. — W.  H.  H.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  17.  The  excited  speech,  begun  with  last 
clause  of  ver.  11,  ends  with  ver.  16,  as  if  from 
sheer  exhaustion.  We  get  the  impression  from 
ver.  16,  that  Zion  [.Jerusalem]  can  speak  no 
more  on  account  of  pain  and  tears.  Therefore 
the  Poet  allows  her  a  pause.  He  speaks  again 
himself,  in  order  partly  to  corroborate  what  has 
been  said,  and  partly  to  adduce  new  matter. 
[There  is  no  necessity  for  assuming  a  change  of 
speakers.  See  remarks  on  vers.  11,  12. — The 
three  ideal  persons  successively  introduced  in 
vers.  1-6,  representing  the  city,  the  nation,  and 
the  Temple, — Jerusalem,  Judah,  and  Zion, — ap- 
pear again,  grouped  together,  in  ver.  17,  but  in 
a  reverse  order, — Zion,  Jacob,  and  Jerusalem. — 
The  poetical  effect  of  this  separate  stanza,  fol- 
lowing and  preceding  several  connected  stanzas, 
is  very  fine.— W.  H.  H.] 

Zion  spreadeth  forth — stretches  out — her 
hands,  and  there  is  none  to  comfort  her, — 
but  there  is  no  Coinforler  for  her.  See  ver.  2. 
The  underlying  thought  is  evidently  this :  Zion 
imploringly  stretched  out  her  hands  for  help, 
but  finds  none,  neither  from  men  nor  from  God, 
for  Jeliovah  Himself  commanded  her  neighbors, 
from  whom  first  of  all  help  was  to  be  expected, 
to  behave  in  an  unfriendly  way  towards  her. 
[Henderson:  "Spreading  out  the  hands  is  a 
token  of  the  greatest  distress."  The  commenta- 
tors generally  agree  in  regarding  this  as  a  ges- 
ture indicating  pain ;  some  even  regard  it  in  the 
sense  of  wringing  the  hands ;  so  Chald^us, 
quoted  by  Rosenmueller,  expandit  Zion  manus 
siias  prx  angustia,  sicut  expandit  mulier,  qui  sedet 
ad pariendum."     (See  Jer.  iv.  31.)     But  holding 


up  or  stretching  out  the  hands  is  a  natural  ges- 
ture of  entreaty,  and  is  constantly  used  in  the 
Bible  in  connection  with  prayer  to  God.  See 
especially  Ex.  ix.  29,  33  ;  1  Kings  viii.  38  ;  Is.  i. 
15;  Ps.  xliv.  21;  cxliii.  6,  where  the  same  He- 
brew verb  is  used  as  here.  Naeqelsbach, 
AuAM  Clark  and  Assembly's  Annotations  give 
it  this  sense  in  our  text.  And  it  is  exceedingly 
appropriate  as  an  act  of  Zion,  the  ideal  repre- 
sentative of  the  religious  element  of. the  theo- 
cracy and  the  seat  of  worship.  Zion  stretches 
out  her  hands  in  prayer,  seeking  the  Divine 
Comforter  (see  ver.  16),  but  finds  Him  not: 
while  Jacob,  the  representative  of  the  theocratic 
people,  is  surrounded  with  enemies,  and  the 
queenly  city,  the  seat  of  the  theocratic  govern- 
ment, is  become  an  object  of  abhorrence. — The 
unusual  occurrence  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  prepo- 
sition with  before  the  word  hands  led  some  of  the 
Jews  to  adopt  a  singular  translation,  which  Dio- 
DATi  adopted  in  the  Italian  version:  '■^Sion  distri- 
bute th  bread  to  herself  with  her  own  hands.  A  de- 
sci-ipiion  of  the  want  of  comfort,  because  that 
amongst  the  Jews,  the  kinsfolks  and  neighbors 
did  use  to  bring  food  to  them  that  mourned  for 
the  death  of  their  nearest  friends,  inviting  them 
to  take  food  and  to  comfort  themselves:  see  Deut. 
xxvi.  14;  Jer.  xvi.  7;  Ezek.  xxiv.  17;  Hos.  ix. 
4."  DiODATi's  Annotations. — W.  H.  H.] — -The 
Lord  [Jehovah]  hath  commanded — given  a 
charge,  see  Num.  xxvii.  I'.t — concerning  Ja- 
cob, that  his  adversaries  should  be  round 
about  him, — that  Ins  nvigkljors  should  be  his  ene- 
mies. The  word  translated  in  E.  V.  roundabout 
him  does  not  indicate  the  place  where  his  enemies 
were  assembled,  but  is  to  be  understood  person- 
ally, as  Jer.  xlvlii.  17,  39:  Jehovah  so  ordered 
it    that    his   neighbors   became   his  oppressors. 


58 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


[The  use  of  the  masculine  pronoun  his,  instead  of 
the  feminine  her,  shows  that  there  is  a  distinction 
between  the  ideal  persons  described.  When  the 
same  person  is  introduced  in  ver.  3,  under  the 
tribal  name  of  Judah,  the  feminine  particles  are 
used  :  but  the  substitution  of  the  name  "Jacob  " 
suggests  with  propriety  the  idea  of  a  man,  ra- 
ther than  of  a  woman. — The  use  of  masculine  or 
feminine  forms  in  Hebrew  indicate  often  delicate 


shades  of  feeling  or  depths  of  thought.  See 
Pauli's  Analecla,  Led.  XXX. — W.  H.  H.]— Je- 
rusalem is  as  a  menstruous  vtroman  among 
them — Jerusalem  has  become  an  object  of  abhor- 
rence in  the  midst  of  them.  The  consequence  is 
that  Zion  [Jerusalem]  at  last  stands  in  the  midst 
of  her  oppressors  as  a  woman  defiled  with  blood 
and  become  an  object  of  horror. 


L  18,  19. 

18  The  Lord  is  righteous;  for  I  have  rebelled  against  his  commandment :  hear,  I 
pray  you,  all  people,  and  behold  my  sorrow  :  my  virgins  and  my  young  men  are  gone 

19  into  captivity.  I  called  for  my  lovers,  hut  they  deceived  me ;  my  priests  and  mine 
elders  gave  up  the  ghost  in  the  city,  while  they  sought  their  meat  to  relieve 
their  souls. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  18. TI'ID   in'3~'3-    This  phrase  in  full  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah.     He  uses  rT^D  alone,  with  an  accusative 

following,  iv.  7,  comp.  T.  23.— [Henderson  :  "For  D'TS^  read  with  the  Keri  D'^jt^H  in  the  vocative."  All  ye  peoples ; 
Beoughton,  Cranmek,  Calvin,  Blatnet,  Boothroyd,  Henderson,  Noyes.— AV.  H.  II.] 

Ver.  19.— The  Part.  3ni<0  is  found  in  Jeremiah,  xxii.  20,  22  ;  x.\x.  1-1.— Ue  also  uses  HO"!,  iv.  29,  but  not  in  Piel.— 
X'U  is  not  found  in  Jeremiati. — [The  1  prefixed  to  ^'yW''  has  the  force  of  in  order  that,  as  in  Job  x.  20,  and  the  phrase  is 
fully  translated  by  our  infinitive.— The  Sept.  and  Syr.  add  the  vjotAs— and  found  nowe.— W.  H.  H.] 

I  strength. — My  virgins  and  my  young  men 
1  are  gone  into  captivity.  See  vers.  4,  5,  16. 
Ver.  19.  The  second  particular  feature  of  her 
!  sorrow  is,  that  her  friends  and  allies  had  deserted 
her. — I  called  for  my  lovers,  but  they  de- 
ceived me — I calledto  my  lovers,  they  deceivedine. 
;  See  ver.  2. — The  last  and  crowning  cause  of  her 
I  sorrow  is,  that  those  who  represented  the  dignity 
I  and  honor  of  Zion  [Jerusalem]  are  reduced  to 
miserable  extremUies  in  order  to  preserve  their 
lives. — My  priests  and  mine  elders  gave 
up  the  ghost=^expired  or  perished — in  the  city. 
[Henderson  :  ^'Elders,  occurring  as  it  here  does 
in  immediate  connection  with  priests,  is  to  be 
understood  in  an  official  sense,  and  not  as  simply 
indicative  of  old  age.  Both,  without  respect  to 
dignity  of  office,  were  under  the  necessity  of  go- 
ing in  quest  of  food."  Tiiey  died  in  the  ci/y — not 
from  the  sword  of  the  enemy  on  the  battle-field, 
but  while  hemmed  in  by  surrounding  enemies, 
and  seeking  food  in  vain  within  the  walls ;  they 
perished  from  sheer  starvation. — W.  H.  H.] — ■ 
■While  they  sought  their  meat  to  relieve 
their  souls — for  they  sought  food  for  them.selues  in 
onirr  to  revive  their  souls.  See  vers.  6-11.  [Words- 
wouTU:  ''for  they  (even  the  priests  and  elders) 
sought  for  meat  (and  sought  in  vain)  to  recover 
their  fainting  souls."  For  themselves,  n/ ;  Rosen- 
MUELLER  explains  the  pronoun  as  used  in  a  re- 
flexive or  reciprocal  sense.  It  is  certainly  em- 
phatic, and  suggests  the  severity  of  the  famine, 
when  the  nobility  are  forced  to  go  themselves  in 
search  of  food  to  preserve  their  own  lives. — 
W.  H.  H.] 


EXEGETICAL   AND  CRITICAL. 

Ver.  18.  Vers.  18,  19  contain  nothing  new. 
They  only  recapitulate.  But  it  is  noteworthy 
that  Zion  [Jerusalem],  who  is  now  again  in  a 
condition  to  speak  [see  remarks  on  preceding 
verse],  begins  with  an  acknowledgment  of  the 
righteousness  of  God  and  of  her  own  unrighteous- 
ness.— The  Lord  is  lighteous— Righteous  is 
He,  Jehovah.  [Owen:  "Righteous  He  Jehovah: 
the  pronoun  is  used  instead  of  the  verb  is — a 
common  thing  in  H.ebrew."]  This  acknow- 
ledgment, that  the  Lord  is  righteous,  is  found  in 
Jer.  xii.  1.  See  Deut.  xxxii.  4  ;  2  Chron.  xii.  6; 
Ps.  cxix.  137  ;  cxxix.  4;  cxlv.  17.— For  I  have 
rebelled  against  His  commandment.  Bet- 
ter, disobeyed  Bis  commandment,  lit.,  resisted  His 
mouth.  The  same  expression  occurs  in  Num.  xx. 
24;  xxvii.  14;  1  Kings  xiii.  21,  26. — Hear,  I 
pray  you  [theHeb.  particle  of  entreaty,  XJ],  all 
people  [lit.,  all  peoples'],  and  behold  my  sor- 
row. Although  willing  to  confess  her  guilt,  yet 
Zion  [Jerusalem]  feels  the  need  of  human  sym- 
pathy. She  summons,  therefore,  as  in  ver.  12, 
all  peoples  to  observe  her  sorrow.  [Since  men 
of  the  acknowledged  taste  of  Henderson  and 
Noyes  sanction  the  use  of  the  reduplicated  plural 
peoples,  we  may  be  allowed  to  retain  it;  espe- 
cially since  no  other  word  in  English  is  its  exact 
equivalent. — \V.  H  H.] — Then  she  recounts,  as 
in  vers.  13-15,  the  principal  causes  of  her  sor- 
row. The  first  is  the  captivity  of  her  young  wo- 
men  and  young  men,  who  are  her  pride  and 


CHAP.  I.  20-22. 


59 


I.  20-22. 

20  Behold,  O  Lord,  for  I  am  in  distress ;  my  bowels  are  troubled ;  mine  heart  is  turned 
within  me :  for  I  have  grievously  rebelled :  abroad  the  sword  bereaveth,  at  home  there 

21  is  as  death.  They  have  heard  that  I  sigh  ;  there  is  none  to  comfort  me :  all  mine  ene- 
mies have  heard  of  my  trouble ;  they  are  glad  that  thou  hast  done  it :  thou  wilt  bring 

22  the  day  that  thou  hast  called,  and  they  shall  be  like  unto  me.  Let  all  their  wicked- 
ness come  before  thee ;  and  do  unto  them  as  thou  hast  done  unto  me  for  all  my  trans- 
gressions :  for  my  sighs  are  many,  and  my  heart  is  faint. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  20.— The  sing.  *12f  never  occurs  in  Jeremiah.    See  ver.  5.    [Naegeisbach  here,  inadvertently  (or  else  he  would 

have  cited  this  ver.  at  ver.  5),  mistakes  the  noun  "^"^  or  *1i*,  used  at  ver.  5,  for  this  ^y,  which  is  3d  sing.  perf.  of  Tl)f,  and 

is  so  given  by  Gesenius,  Fuerst  and  Davidson,  and  is  translated  as  a  verb  by  nearly  all  the  versions. — W.  II.  II.] — ''V'O  in 

Jer.  iv.  19  ;  xxxi.  SO.^OD'^Dni  to  hoil,  move  in  an  undulating  manner ;  except  here  and  ii.  11,  only  in  Job  xvi.  16. — See 

T  :  -t: 
Olsh.,  2  2.52,  6. — The  pause  accent  Aatliciiah  belongs  undtr  '3"1p.     [An  unnecessary  change  of  punctuation. — W.  II.  H.J — 

rr^O-    See  ver.  18.    The  Inf.  no  is  found  only  here.— The  Piel  S  jiy,  in  Jer.  xv.  7.    Comp.  i.  9 ;  Lev.  xxvi.  22 ;  1  Sam.  iv. 

33.— Y^nO./ori's,  Jer.  xxi.  4. 

Ver.  21. — [IJ^OtJ'-    The  Sept.  and  Syr.  improperly  render  it  in  the  Imperative. — W.  H.  H.] — njXJ,  see  ver.  i. — PIV'^,  a 

very  current  word  with  Jeremiah. — tUVi,',  Jer.  xxxii.  41. — ri't^y  as  the  antithesis  of  speaking,  as  Jer.  iii.  5.     [If  we  take 

T      •      T 

doing  here  as  the  antithesis  of  speaking,  the  absence  of  the  affix  is  emphatical.  Thou  hast  done,  acted,  as  well  as  spoken. 
This  verb  often  occurs  without  an  object  expressed.     See  I'uerst,  Lex. — \V.  H.  H.]— riX3n,  as  Jer.  vi.  19  ;  xi.  11,  and  else- 

T 

where. — Nip,  of  prophetical  proclamation,  Jer.  ii.  2;  vii.  2  ;  xix.  2. 

Ver.  22. — XJH-    On  account  of  the  Imperative  7*71 17,  we  must  understand  this  as  stronger  than  a  wish  :  let  it  come 
which  is  grammatically  allowable.    See  my  Gr.,  §  89,  3  c. — The  phrase  'JS  7   Hyi   HNS  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah.— 

II.  T  T  T>T 

7  71^1-     See  ver.  12.    [Wordsworth  says,  "the  primary  notion"  of  this  word  ''seems  to  be  that  of  plucking,"  and  refers  to 

Gesen.,  633.     So  Cranmer's  B.:  Thou  shall  pluck  them  away  even  as  thou  hast  plucked  me.    The  Sept.  gives  it  the  sense  of 

racemandi,  gleaning  ;  and  substitutes  3d  person  plur.  for  2d  sing.,  and  does  not  translate  ^7  at  all.     Kal  cn-K^iiAAio-oi'  aurois, 

ov  TpoTTov  eTTOirjo-o.i'  eTTii^uAAiSa.  The  Vulg.  takes  it  in  the  sense  of  gathering  the  vintage,  and  preserves  the  grammatical 
construction  of  the  original  :  vindemin  eos  sicut  vindemiasti  me.  Instead  of  the  eTTi<j>v\\L<Tov  of  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  the 
Codex  Alexandrinus  has  iTTi(j>av\i.<Tot',  whicli  seems  to  mean  reject  them  as  vile.     That  our  version  is  correct  would  appear 

from  the  use  of  Dw'lJ^D  for  actions,  doings,  or  deeds.    See  Jer.  xvii.  10  ;  Prov.  xx.  11.    See  Rosenmueller. — W.  H.  H.] — 

'VC'3~73  IV-    See  vers.  5, 14.— TltUX,  ver.  6.— '^  '37  is  found  in  Jeremiah,  viii.  18,  comp.  Is.  i.  5. 
T  T  :        T         -  -      :  -  — 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

The  Poet  closes  with  a  prayer,  which  is  com- 
posed of  an  exordium,  ver.  20  a;  two  prin- 
cipal parts:  1.  Ver.  20  b,  to  ver.  21  c.  2. 
Ver.  21  c,  to  ver.  22  c  ;  and  a  conclusion,  ver. 
22  c. 

Ver.  20.  Behold,  O  Lord  ;  for  I  am  in  dis- 
tress,— Behold,  0  Jehovah,  how  lam  distre-ised ! 
With  these  words.  Behold,  O  Jehovah,  how  hadli/ 
it  fares  with  me,  first  of  all,  the  attention  of  Je- 
hovah is  directed  to  Zion,and  her  misfortune  is  in 
general  terms  commended  to  His  consideration. 
— The  words  Behold,  0  Jehovah,  are  the  same  as 
See,  0  Jehovah,  of  ver.  11. — Then  follows  the 
first  part  of  the  prayer,  which  extends  to  ver. 
21  c,  in  which  are  successively  detailed  the  causes 
of  her  distress,  proceeding  from  those  of  an  in- 
ternal to  those  of  an  external  cliaracter.  1.  We 
have  her  sufferings  subjectively  considered,  in  two 
particulars — (a).  My  bowels  are  troubled. 
[He\df;uson:  My  bowels  arc  made  to  boil.  Nae- 
GELSB  \f;n  :  Meine  Eingewide  wallen  siederid  aiif. 
The  Hebrew  word  "  is  strongly  expressive  of 
that  violently  excited  state  of  the  intestines  which 
is  occasioned  by  excessive  grief  "  (Henderson), 


or  rather,  which  was  employed  as  an  image  of 
mental  perturbations  and  distress. — W.  H.  H.] 
(b). — Mine  heart  is  turned  within  me.  The 
expression  is  found  in  this  sense,  of  the  turning 
of  the  heart  as  a  symptom  of  the  most  painful 
affection,  only  elsewhere  in  Hos.  xi.  8.  In 
another  sense,  Ex.  xiv.  5. — 2.  We  have  a  state- 
ment of  the  reason  which  has  occasioned  her 
chastisement. — For  I  have  grievously  re- 
beHed.  Since  J  rebelliousli/  have  rebelled.  These 
words  belong  evidently  to  what  follows,  and  ac- 
cordingly the  particle  at  the  beginning  is  not /or, 
but  since,  or  because.  For  the  first  and  immedi- 
ate result  of  disobedience  was  the  punishment 
described  in  what  follows,  rather  than  the  suf- 
fering caused  by  that  punishment.  Besides  if 
this  clause  belongs  to  what  precedes  it,  then  the 
first  half  of  the  verse  has  four  members,  and  the 
last  only  two.  [The  sense  is  not  affected, 
whether  we  connect  this  with  what  precedes,  or 
with  what  follows.  The  irregular  division  of  the 
verses  is  too  common  to  authorize  here  a  change 
in  the  Masoretic  punctuation,  such  as  Naj;gels- 
BACH  proposes  (see  Gram,  note  above),  merely  for 
the  sake  of  an  equal  division  of  this  verse. — W. 
H.  H.] — -3.  We  have  the  punishment  itself  in 
declarations  of  concentrated  meaning. — Abroad 


«0 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


the  sword  bereaveth.  at  home  there  is  as 
death, — Rages  withoxit  the  sirord,  on  willtin  Death. 
For  the  sense  according  to  kindred  places,  we 
have  Jer.  xiv.  18  ;  Ez.  vii.  15.  By  death  in  an- 
tithesis to  the  sword  it  is  natural  to  understand, 
death  wrought  by  hunger,  or  pestilence.  See 
Jer.  XV.  2  ;  xviii.  21.  [Boothroyd  :  "  Death  as 
it  were  acting  in  propria  persona,  and  not  by  the 
instrumentality  of  aiiotluT,  as  \v!i('!i  a  person  is 
slain  by  the  sword"  (Biblia  Uebraica).  See  Jer. 
ix.  21;  Hab.  ii.  5.  Adam  Clark  gives  examples 
from  the  poets  of  similar  personification  of  death. 
—  W.  H.  H.] 

['S  1^,  impers.  lit.,  it  is  strait  to  me,  that  is,  / 
am  in  a  strait,  I  am  distressed,  I  grieve.  ''7~iy~''3 
seems  itself  a  cry  of  distress,  the  sharpness  of 
which  is  lost  in  the  E.  Y.,for  J  am  in  distress. — 
My  boivels,  etc.  It  seems  impossible  to  repro- 
duce this  in  an  English  form  ;  at  least  our  ideas 
of  the  commotions  of  the  bowels  have  no  associa- 
tion with  agitations  of  the  mind.  To  say  with 
Henderson,  "my  bowels  are  made  to  boil," 
though  it  seems  to  be  sanctioned  by  the  meaning 
of  the  verb,  yet  does  not  really  express  the  idea 
of  violent  motion,  as  witnessed  in  boiling  water, 
or  the  surging  of  the  ocean,  which  is  the  idea 
intended.  To  say  with  Notes,  My  boivels  boil,  is 
worse  yet,  as  the  verb  is  strictly  passive.  If  we 
might  be  allowed  to  ignore  the  figure,  and  say 
simply,  »(«/  7ni7id  is  greatly  agitated,  we  would  more 
correctly  interpret  the  words  to  English  ears, 
than  by  a  figurative  use  of  the  word  bowels,  that 
never  'was  ingrafted  into  English  thoughts  and 
feelings.  If  we  could  accept  the  opinion  that  in 
ancient  usage  the  word  boivels  denoted  the  upper 
viscera  and  was  not  restricted  as  by  modern 
usage  to  the  lower  viscera  (see  Alexander  on 
Is.  xvi.  11),  we  might  substitute  the  vf  or d  bosojn 
with  advantage.  But  accepting  the  usual  signifi- 
cation of  '^O,  we  can  give  to  nO"^"5n  no  other 
English  form  than  we  have  done,  greatly  troubled. 
Owen:  "  Troubled,  or  disquieted,  is  the  rendering 
of  all  the  versions,  and  also  of  the  Targ.  As  it 
is  a  reduplicate,  the  verb  means  greatly  troubled 

or  greatly  disturbed,  or  violently  agitated." — ''S/ 
"IDHJ.  RosENMUELLER  refers  to  a  similar  phrase 
in  Ps.  xxxviii.  11 ;  "^n"'np  ""S ',  cor  meum  circumit, 
circumagitur :  Alexander  explains  it  of  "the 
palpitation  of  the  heart,  denoting  violent  agita- 
tion."— W.  H.  H.] — The  reading  r\irD3,  whatever 
may  be  urged  against  it,  is  very  old,  for  the  Sept. 
has  uarrep  -ddvaro^.  But  it  is  impossible  to  at- 
tach to  this  2  (if  it  be  understood  here  as  a 
particle  of  comparison,  or  as  a  so-called  Kaph 
veritatis),  a  pertinent  sense.  For  r\'33  stands 
here  in  antithesis  to  ^IPID;  7171112^  is  their  com- 
mon predicate  ;  and  to  fill  out  the  sense  there 
should  be  a  subject  indicated  corresponding  to 
3"in.  To  supply  2^n  again,  or  with  Ewald  the 
idea  '^  something  similar''  before  rilJSS,  would  give 
us  a  construction  in  the  highest  degree  forced 
and  unnatural.  Unless  we  suppose  a  mistake  of 
the  transcriber  and  read  simply  ril^L*'  "■**  '^^ 
Syriac  has  it,  there  is  nothing  left  but  to  trans- 
pose the   words,  and  to  read  r\"32  r\1J33,  which 


the  text  of  the  Sept.  seems  to  sanction,  for  since 
the  Sept.  translates  ug  ^^dvarog  kv  oIku,  its  au- 
thors apparently  read  the  Hebrew  words  in  the 
order  indicated.  [Rosenmueller:  "Pareau  re- 
gards the  2,  placed  before  mo  in  this  place,  not 
as  the  particle  of  similitude,  but  what  the  Gram- 
marians call  tlio  D  veritatis,  which  not  seldom  is 
used  for  the  name  of  the  thing  or  person  referred 
to.  But  I  proler  to  suppose,  Wxth  L(ewe  and 
WoLFSsoHN,  that  the  words  are  to  be  transposed, 

as  may  be  done ;  n;33  n]p3  2"}^  nSnti?  |*inp, 
without  the  sword  bereeives,  even  as  death  within." — 
Henderson  has  a  curiously  unsatisfactory  re- 
mark, which  his  translation  doos  not  clear  up, 
"  the  Caph  is  the  Caph  veritatis  expressing  the 
reality  of  the  thing."  What  "thing?"  Famine 
or  pestilence?  We  must  either  adopt  Naegels- 
bach's  opinion,  with  which  Sept.,  Syr.  and  Arab, 
agree,  and  transpose  the  words.  Abroad  the  sword 
has  bereaved  me,  as  death  at  home;  or  suppose  an 
awkward  prosopopoeia  in  the  substitution  of  the 
word  death  for  famine  ov  pestilence,  in  which  case 
the  3  is  strictly  the  3  veritatis  ;  or  we  must  trans- 
late as  Henderson  (though  his  translation  is  at 
variance  with  his  explanation).  Abroad  the  sword 
bereaveth,  in  the  house  it  is  as  death,  and  accept 
the  suggestion  of  Calvin,  that  the  2  is  the  2  of 
similitude,  at  home  it  is  as  death,  as  if  he  would 
say,  nothing  met  them  at  home  but  that  which 
was  like  death  itself.  There  is  iis  lii;le,  if  not 
less,  difficulty  in  the  first  of  these  explanations, 
as  in  either  of  the  others. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  21.  4.  We  have  the  rejoicing  of  her  ene- 
mies at  her  misfortunes.  This  subject,  now  first 
alluded  to,  the  Poet  dwells  upon  at  some  length, 
whilst  he  only  briefly  indicated  the  nuvtters  that 
have  been  moutioned. — They  have  heard  that 
I  sigh,  there  is  none  to  comfort  me, — tliat  1 
have  no  coinjoricr. — All  mine  enemies  have 
heard  of  my  trouble.  What  the  enemies  heard 
is  described  as  if  it  came  to  t!i?m  bo:-ne  on  suc- 
cessive waves  of  rumor,  proceeding  by  degrees 
from  the  circumference  to  the  very  centre  of 
their  grief.  At  first  they  heard  how  Zion  [Jeru- 
salem] bitterly  mourned,  because  left  alone,  with- 
out Comforter  and  Helper  (see  ver.  2),  she  was 
exposed  to  the  violence  of  her  enemies.  Then 
they  [her  enemies]  began  to  comprehend  the  na- 
ture and  extent  of  her  misfortune.  But  they  re- 
joiced that  Jehovah  had  done  it,  that  is  to  say, 
He  had  actually  brought  about  the  day  which  He 
had  before  predicted. — They  are  glad  that 
Thou  hast  done  it.  Thou  wilt  bring  the 
day  that  Thou  hast  called  (Marg.,  pro- 
claimed). They  rejoiced  because  Thou  hast  done 
it,  that  Thou  hast  brought  the  day  Thou  hadst  pro- 
claimed. It  will  be  observed  that  1  take  the  last 
clause  as  epexegetical.  This  seems  to  me  neces- 
sary. For,  1.  To  give  a  precatory  sense  to  the 
last  clause  [as  Luther,  let  the  day  come;  Hen- 
derson :  Bring  the  day  ivhich  Thou  hast  announced ; 
NoYES:  O  bring  the  day  ivhich  Thou  hast  appointed. 
— W.  H.  H.]  is  very  forced.  2.  These  words  are 
a  very  suitable  explanation  of  the  preceding 
clause  :  the  Lord  has  done  it  by  bringing  about 
in  fact  the  day  He  had  predicted  or  proclaimed, 
that  is  to  say.  He  had  not  merely  spoken,  but 
acted  [not  merely  threatened,  but  carried  His 
threat  into  execution,  by  doing  what  He  had  said 


CHAi'.    1. 


Gl 


He  would  do].  Least  of  all  can  we  say,  Thou 
bringest,  Thou  proclaimest  the  day,  for  this  would 
require  a  change  in  the  order  of  the  words  in 
the  Hebrew,  and  the  text  should  read  DV  HXIp- 

T        tIt 

EwALD,  following  the  Sept.  ["ETr^j-aypf  fjiiepav, 
£Kd},Eaag  Kaipoi'l^,  supplies  fl^  [an  appointed  time] 
after  flN'lp.  This  is  unnecessary  and  arbitrary. 
[Calvin  explains  this  clause  as  Naegelsbach 
does:  and  his  English  translator,  Owen,  remarks: 
"  Our  version  is  wrong  in  rendering  this  clause 
in  the  future  tense.  The  reference  is  not  to  the 
day  of  vengeance  to  the  Babylonians,  but  to  the 
day  of  vengeance  which  God  had  brought  on  His 
own  people.  The  versions,  except  the  Syr.,  give 
the  verb  in  the  past  tense."  So  Wordsworth: 
"  They  are  glad  that  Thou  hast  done  it ;  that  Thou 
hast  brought  (upon  me)  the  day  (of  sorrow)  which 
Thou  hadst  proclaimed  (by  Thy  prophets,  who 
warned  me  of  my  impending  destruction)." — AV. 
H.  H.].  That  the  Lord  had  threatened  the  peo- 
ple of  Israel  with  eventual  destruction,  was  well 
known  to  the  heathen.  See  Jer.  xl.  2,  3. — 
And  they  shaU  be  like  unto  me.  The 
second  principal  part  of  the  prayer  begins  with 
this  petition,  that  the  Lord  would  visit  her  ene- 
mies with  the  same  fiite  which  had  befallen  her. 
[Wordsworth:  "The  Edomites,  Moabites  and 
Ammonites,  who  exulted  over  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  will  share  the  same  fate,  at  the  hand 
of  the  same  enemy.  See  iv.  21  ;  Jer.  xii.  14; 
XXV.  21  ;  and  Babylon  lierself  also  will  be  pun- 
ished for  her  cruelty  to  Zion  (Jer.  1.  9,  10;  li. 
35;  Is.  xlvii.  6)]." 

It  cannot  be  objected  to  the  above  interpreta- 
tion, that  then  the  adversative  sentence  should 
begin  with  Oni,  for  the  subject  of  the  adversative 
sentence  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  preceding  one, 
only  viewed  in  a  different  light.  Whilst  what 
precedes  shows  what  the  enemies  hitherto  had 
done  (IJ^ptr;,  i;;pt:/,  Wr),  the  adversative  sen- 
tence shows  what  in  the  future  will  be  done  to 
them:  therefore,  from  lyoti/  to  HNTp  the  perfect 

:   |T  T     tIt  ' 

only  is  used,  from  '''H'l  the  imperfect  only.  If 
the  sentence  began  with  nXDH,  the  proper  gram- 
matical construction  would  be -vm  or  xipn  Nori 

T  :  tI:  •  •  T 

''V^^- — [^V^^-  Rosenmueller:  "In  the  repeti- 
tion of  this  word  there  is  emphasis,  as  below,  iii. 
43,  44  ;  Ps.  cxxiv.  1,  2.  The  introduction  of  this 
verb,  at  first,  without  a  subject  expressed,  was 
doubtless  an  expedient  suggested  by  the  alpha- 
betical arrangement  of  the  verses  which  required 
an  initial  W ;  but  its  introduction  in  the  next 
clause,  with  the  subject  expressed,  and  that  in  an 
intensified  form, —  ''heard  (have  they)  that  I 
sigh,"  etc. — "  ALL  my  enemies  heard  of  my  trouble" 
— is  one  of  those  triumphs  of  the  art  of  the  true 
poet,  by  which  he  makes  even  the  artificial  and 
arbitrary  laws  of  poetry  contribute  to  the  force 
and  beauty  of  his  sentiments, — '3.  Owen: 
"  There  are  here  two  instances  of  '3  being  carried 
on  to  the  next  clause, — 

Heard  have  they  tliat  I  stgh,  Wai  I  have  no  romfnrter: 
All  mine  enemies  have  heard  of  my  evil ;  luey  have  rejoiced 
That  Thou  hast  done  it,  that  Thou  hast  brought  the  day 
Thou  hast  announced." 

It  ii  better,  however,  to  consider  each   '3   as 


uniting  the  two  clauses  that  follow  it  as  in  close 
apposition,  in  each  case  the  latter  clause  being 
explanatory  of  the  preceding  one:  They  heard 
that  I  sigh,  I  have  no  comforter,  i.  e.,  I  sigh  be- 
cause I  have  no  comforter.  They  rejoiced  thai 
Thou  hast  done  it.  Thou  hast  brought  the  day,  i.  e., 
Thou  hast  done  it  by  bringing  the  day. — Thuu 
hast  done  il.  The  gloss  of  the  famous  Jew,  Jar- 
CHi,  quoted  by  Rosenmueller,  is  singular,  and 
shows  what  far-fetched  interpretations  of  Scrip- 
ture have  been  allowed:  "Thou  hast  afforded 
the  occasion  why  my  enemies  have  hated  me  and 
rejoiced  in  my  misfortune,  because  Thou  hast 
given  us  commandment  not  to  eat  and  drink  what 
they  do,  nor  to  enter  into  marriages  with  them. 
If  only  I  had  joined  myself  in  marriage  with 
them,  they  would  have  been  disposed  to  pity  me 
and  the  children  of  their  own  daughters." — W. 
H.  H.] 

Ver.  22.  Let  aU  their  'wickedness  come 
before  Thee.  The  expression  come  before  Thee 
is  to  be  understood  in  the  sense  of  becoming  ac- 
quainted with.  See  Gen.  xxxvii.  2. — And  do 
unto  them  as  thou  hast  done  unto  me  fot 
all  my  transgressions  [see  gram,  notes  above]. 
For  my  sighs  are  many  and  my  heart  is 
faint.  The  conclusion  of  the  prayer  contains  a 
declaration  of  fact.  It  is  impossible  to  refer  this 
to  the  thoughts  immediately  before  expressed: 
for  neither  confession  of  sin  ("for  all  my  trans- 
gressions"), nor  prayer  for  the  retribution  of 
the  injustice  done  by  her  enemies  ("do  unto 
them  as  they  have  done  unto  me"),  could  sug- 
gest this  concluding  sentence.  Rather,  it  relates 
generally  to  the  prayer  for  help,  which  is  con- 
tained as  well  under  the  second  head,  as  in  the 
first  part  of  the  prayer.  This  last  clause,  con- 
taining the  evidence  of  her  need  of  help,  natu- 
rally recalls  the  prayer  for  help. 

DOCTRINAL   AND    ETHICAL. 

1.  Vers.  1-3.  This  change  of  fortune,  befallen 
the  holy  city  and  holy  people,  may  well  claim 
our  sympathy  in  the  highest  degree.  But  at  the 
same  time  we  should  let  it  be  to  us  a  solemn 
warning.  For  if  this  was  done  to  the  green 
tree,  what  shall  be  done  to  the  dry  (Luke  xxiii. 
31)  ?  If  God  rejected  the  people  whom  He  called 
the  apple  of  His  eye  (Dent,  xxxii.  10),  if  He  ex- 
posed to  destruction  the  city,  in  reference  to 
which  He  said,  that  "His  fire  is  in  Zion,  and 
His  furnace  in  Jerusalem"  (Is.  xxxi.  9),  what 
claim  can  the  people,  kingdoms  and  dynasties  of 
the  Gentiles  have? — what  claim  can  the  particu- 
lar Christian  churches  even  have  ? — what  claim 
can  Rome,  Geneva  and  Wirtemberg  have  to  the 
privilege  of  eternal  existence?  Truly,  since  the 
Lord  could  destroy  Jerusalem  and  entirely  lay 
waste  Canaan,  without  being  unfaithful  to  His 
promise  given  to  the  Fathers,  eveii  so  He  can  re- 
move the  candlestick  of  every  particular  Christian 
church,  without  breaking  the  promise  given  to 
the  church  at  large,  that  the  gates  of  Hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  it  (Matth.  xvi.  18). 

2.  Vers.  1-11.  "From  Jeremiah's  passionate 
lamentation  over  the  wretched  condition  of  the 
Jewish  land  and  people,  we  derive  a  lesson  in 
reference  to  the  manner  in  which  one  in  groat 
affliction  and  misery  may  be  allowed  to  behave. 


62 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


There  have  been  found,  among  the  heathen,  per- 
sons reputed  for  wisdom,  some  of  whom  have  held 
the  opinion,  that  a  wise,  intelligent  man  should 
be  altogether  emotionless,  neither  rejoicing  in 
good  fortune,  nor  cast  down  by  bad  fortune,  but 
willing  to  let  things  be  as  they  are.  But  we  see 
the  very  opposite  of  this  in  pious,  holy  persons, 
especially  here  in  Jeremiah,  where  he  bitterly 
laments  the  misery  of  his  people  and  fatherland. 
Could  he  have  hoped  for  deliverance  from  that 
misery,  or  any  mitigation  of  it,  how  heartily 
would  he  have  rejoiced !  And  such  emotions,  if 
properly  controlled,  are  not  obnoxious  to  God, 
since  He  Himself  has  implanted  them  in  our  hu- 
man nature.  As  it  would  displease  a  faithful 
father,  should  his  children  laugh  when  he  pun- 
ished them,  so  it  cannot  please  God  when  His 
people  show  no  sign  of  grief  on  account  of  His 
chastisements.  If  we  should,  in  the  ordinary 
afi'airs  of  life,  rejoice  with  those  who  rejoice,  and 
weep  with  those  who  weep  (Rom.  xii.  15),  and  as 
the  elect  of  God,  holy  and  beloved,  should  mani- 
fest hearty  commiseration  towards  the  suffering 
(Col.  iii.  12),  much  more  should  we,  in  times  of 
general  and  national  calamities,  not  then  be  joy- 
ful, but  heartily  mourn  and  lament  on  account 
of  the  losses  and  evils  suffered  by  the  public 
generally.  Those  who  do  not  so,  the  Lord  God 
reproves  ;  because  they  eat  and  drink  joyfully, 
and  are  not  at  all  concerned  for  the  calamity  of 
Joseph,  He  threatens  severely  to  punish  their 
false  security."  Wueetem.  Summ. 

3.  Ver.  1.  The  Targum  Jonathan  compares 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  with  the  expulsion 
from  Paradise:  "It  was  with  Jerusalem  as  with 
Adam  and  Eve,  when  they  were  judged,  who 
were  ejected  from  the  Paradise  of  pleasure,  and 
then  the  Governor  of  the  universe  lamented  over 
them." — Origen  conceives  that  under  the  image 
of  Jerusalem,  formerly  noble  and  splendid,  but 
now  become  widowed  and  servile,  the  human 
soul  is  represented:  "In  a  sublimer  sense,  Jeru- 
salem, in  the  enjoyment  of  felicity,  abounding 
in  people  and  nations,  and  the  head  of  provinces, 
is  the  (divina  est  anima)  soul  which  is  of  divine 
origin.  *  *  *  Even  as  we  are  permitted  to  see 
Jerusalem,  living  in  the  greatest  prosperity,  with 
a  large  population,  crowded  with  foreigners,  and 
head  of  the  provinces,  but  when  virtue  fails,  de- 
solate and  widowed  and  enslaved,  so  that  it  be- 
comes tributary  to  the  enemy  that  conquered  it, 
so  it  happens  to  the  soul  of  him  who  has  fallen 
from  virtue."  Ghisler.,  p.  11. — So  also  Olymi'io- 
uoRUs:  "She  became  as  a  widow,  having  been 
deprived  of  the  bridegroom — the  Logos." — So 
also  Rhaban  Maurus:  "Lamentation  is  made 
for  the  faithful  soul  of  man,  which  formerly  was 
full  of  virtues  and  controlled  its  various  passions, 
governing  tne  appetites  of  the  flesh;  but  after- 
wards inflamed  by  the  fire  of  lust  through  the 
agency  of  malignant  spirits,  deprived  of  angelic.vl 
consolation  and  wanting  divine  communion,  it 
was  givea  over  to  serve  as  many  masters  as  it 
liad  vices."  Ibid.,  p.  10.— Hugo  a  Sancto  Vic- 
tore:  "When  God  reigning  in  our  hearts  go- 
verns us,  then  the  flesh  subjected  serves  Him  in 
the  outward  life,  and  in  proportion  as  we  are  in- 
wardly more  humbly  submissive  to  Him,  we  have 
in  a  stronger  degree  the  mastery  over  the  out- 
ward life.     Thus,  therefore,  our  soul,  when  it 


had  God  for  its  King,  was  withiu  'full  of  people,' 
i.e.,  of  virtues,  and  without  was  also  'mistress 
of  the  nations' — that  is,  of  carnal  desires,  and 
'a  princess  of  provinces' — that  is,  of  the  bodily 
senses.  But  now  she  is  'solitary,'  because  she 
has  lost  her  king ;  she  is  a  '  widow,'  because  she 
is  separated  from  her  husband;  she  is  'tribu- 
tary,' because  she  serves  the  vices  to  which  she 
is  subject."  Ibid. 

4.  Ver.  1.  Jerusalem,  in  this  passage,  is  re- 
garded by  many  as  a  type  of  the  church.  So 
says  Paschasius  Radbertus  :  "The  Prophet 
mourns,  not  only  because  shesitteth  in  garments 
soiled  with  dust  and  earthly  deeds  (sedet  pulve- 
reis  et  terrenis  operibus  sordidata),  but  espe- 
cially because  she  'sitteth  solitary.'  Solitary, 
moreover,  because  'as  a  widow.'  And  widowed, 
because  she  has  been  deserted  by  her  husband  on 
account  of  the  filtiiiness  of  her  turpitude.  But 
it  should  be  observeil  that  she  is  said  to  be  '«.?  a 
widow,'  and  not  really  a  widow;  since,  although 
she  is  despised  by  her  spouse,  yet  her  rights  of 
marriage  remain,  so  that  if  she  should  reform 
and  discharge  the  duties  of  her  former  love,  she 
may  at  least  receive  her  husband  and  immortality 
through  her  penitence."  Ghisler.,  p.  9. — Hugo 
a  Sancto  Victore  allegorizes  in  another  fashion: 
"  How  is  it  that  while  we  perceive  so  many  peo- 
ple in  the  church,  we  see  the  church  herself  'so- 
litary ?'  Because  we  can  find  hardly  any  one 
who  may  be  esteemed  as  truly  with  the  church. 
*  *  *  As  Christ  remains  untouched  by  the 
crowd  pressing  upon  Him  (Mark  v.  24-34),  so 
the  church,  the  body  of  Christ,  '  sitteth  solitary' 
amidst  a  multitude,  because  the  Catholic  faith 
has  many  professors,  but  few  imitators."  Ibid., 
pp.  9,  10. — In  another  way  still,  the  Abbot  Ru- 
pert VON  Deutz:  "What  city  is  it  that  was  'full 
of  people,'  etc.?  That  holy  city,  Jerusalem,  for- 
sooth, the  mother  of  us  all,  whose  citizens  we 
are,  whosoever  of  us  .are  believers.  That  city, 
before  the  creation  of  the  world,  was  already 
full  of  people  in  the  foreknowledge  or  predesti- 
nation of  God.  *  *  *  How  has  it  come  to  pass 
that  she  should  sit  solitary,  should  become  as  a 
widow,  should  pay  tribute  ?  Forsooth  by  trans- 
gressing; namely,  by  one  man's  sinning,  the  first 
man's,  for  in  him  the  whole  multitude  of  his  pos- 
terity sinned  and  suffered  condemnation.  Thus 
has  it  come  to  pass  that  the  holy  city  should  sit 
solitary — should  sit,  as  it  were,  as  a  widow,  not 
having  her  husband — God,  a  church  holy  through 
faitli,  though  cast  out  of  Paradise,  a  wanderer 
in  this  world,  suffering  through  exile,  death  and 
an  offended  Lord — that  is,  paying  penal  tribute 
for  sin."  Ibid.,  p.  10. 

[5.  Vers.  1-11.  With  regard  to  the  allegorical 
and  mystical  interpretations  of  this  song,  we  may 
adopt  the  language  of  Kitto  on  1  Sam.  xvii.: 
'■Altiiough  we  do  not,  with  some,  think  that 
'ihc.ic  things  are  an  allegory,'  *  *  *  it  is  impossi- 
ble for  the  experienced  Christian  to  read  it  with- 
out being  reminded  of  eventful  passages  in  his 
own  spiritual  history.  Tliere  is  no  doubt  sonic 
mysterious  connection  bet  ween  even  the  external 
things  of  Scripture  history,  and  the  inner  tilings 
of  our  spiritual  life,  which  'the  wise'  are  ci  a- 
bled,  by  the  Spirit's  teaching,  to  discern,  jind 
wliich  renders  the  seemingly  least  spiritual  pints 
of  the  holy  writ  richly  nourishing  to  their  souls" 


CHAP.  I. 


33 


{Daily  Bible  Illustrations). — Scott:  "The  se- 
rious mind  perceives  abundant  cause  to  meditate, 
with  solemn  awe  and  deep  concern,  on  the  to- 
kens of  His  indignation  at  the  sins  of  men.  *  *  ■* 
How  is  it  that  so  many  populous  cities  now  sit 
solitary?  That  so  many  flourishing  empires  are 
now  become  tributary  and  enslaved?  Whence  are 
the  tears,  with  which  vast  multitudes  wear  aw;iy 
their  restless  nights  and  joyless  days;  whilst 
they  mourn  the  loss  of  dear  relatives,  the  trea- 
chery of  professed  friends,  the  cruelty  of  ene- 
mies, the  oppression  of  the  powerful,  the  fury  of 
persecutors,  grievous  servitude  and  multiplied 
afiBictions  ?  Whence  is  it,  that  idolaters  now  oc- 
cupy the  places  where  flourishing  churches  once 
were?  That  the  ways  of  Zion  are  deserted,  her 
ordinances  interrupted  or  profaned,  her  gates 
desolated,  her  priests  and  people  in  bitterness, 
or  cut  off?  How  is  it  that  the  adversaries  of  the 
church  are  the  chief,  and  prosper,  and  that  her 
children  are  in  captivity?  However  we  may 
vary  our  inquiries,  the  same  answer  recurs:  the 
fierce  anger  of  the  Lord  for  man's  transgressions 
hath  filled  the  earth  with  sighs  and  groans,  with 
tears,  sickness  and  death.  *  *  *  Sin  fills  our 
consciences  with  remorse  and  our  hearts  with 
terror;  deprives  the  soul  of  strength  and  confi- 
dence; perverts  every  pleasant  thing  and  every 
good  gift  of  God,  and  even  His  truths.  Sabbaths 
and  ordinances  into  occasions  of  deeper  con- 
demnation and  misery.  *  *  *  Among  the  ma- 
nifold evil  effects  of  sin,  the  pious  mind  is  pecu- 
liarly grieved,  when,  being  committed  by  profes- 
sors of  true  religion,  it  causes  the  enemies  of 
God  to  blaspheme,  and  to  mock  and  scofi^  at  the 
truths  and  ordinances  of  His  word  and  worship. 
Wo  be  to  the  world  because  of  such  ofi"ences :  and 
wo  be  to  those  by  whom  such  ofi'ences  come,  ex- 
cept their  repentance  be  as  deep  as  their  trans- 
gressions are  aggravated.  We  ought  to  prefer 
any  of  the  other  temporal  efi"ects  of  sin  to  this. 
Should  any  be  wonderfully  brought  down  from 
the  height  of  aflliience  to  the  depth  of  penury  ; 
should  their  honor  be  changed  for  contempt; 
should  they  have  no  comforter  in  afiiiction,  and 
be  constrained  to  part  with  all  their  pleasant 
things  for  bread  to  sustain  life;  nay,  should 
they  have  the  prospect  of  dying  by  famine;  yet 
all  this  ought  to  be  considered  as  far  less  afflict- 
ing than  that  their  sins  should  cause  the  name, 
truths  and  ordinances  of  God  to  be  blasphemed  ; 
and  men  to  stumble  and  fall  and  perish  forever, 
through  the  increasing  prejudice,  hardness  and 
impiety  that  they  have  excited.  Even  the  pro- 
fanation of  sacred  things,  and  the  sacrilege  of 
those  who,  in  ditferent  ages,  have  laid  their  ra- 
pacious hands  on  the  substance  which  was  dedi- 
cated to  the  support  of  religion;  and  the  con- 
tempt with  which  the  clerical  ofiice  hath  been 
treated  by  profligates  and  infidels  ,  have  in  great 
measure  been  chargeable  upon  the  atrocious 
sins  of  professors  and  preachers  of  the  gospel, 
who  have  rendered  themselves  vile,  and  exposed 
themselves  to  shame  Dy  their  evident  miscon- 
duct: aiid  therefore  the  Lord  hath  made  them 
vile  and  contemptible  even  to  the  most  abandoned 
of  mankind."  [Practical  Observations). — W.  H.  H.] 
6.  Vers.  1-3.  "  If  God's  chastisements  begin, 
they  come  not  once,  twice,  or  thrice  only,  but  tliey 
fol!(?w  one    after   another,  as  one   wave  pursues 


another  in  a  tempestuous  ocean  (Ps.  xlii.  8). 
For  no  misfortune  comes  alone,  as  is  plainly  seen 
in  the  present  instance  in  the  case  of  the  Jews." 
Cramer  according  to  Eo.  Hunnius  ISer.  2,  p 
28). 

7.  Ver.  4.  •'  What  an  unspeakable  blessing  of 
God  it  is,  when  He  gives  public  tranquility,  so 
that  people  may  come  in  crowds  and  regularly 
observe  the  holy  rites  of  Divine  worship,  the 
world  knows  not,  until  God  creates  a  famine  of 
His  Word  and  people  seek  for  it  over  land  and 
water  without  finding  it.  Let  us  be  admonished 
to  love  the  Word  of  God  and  the  sanctuary  where 
it  is  preached.  Example:  David,  Ps.  xxvi.  8; 
xxvii.  4."  Cramer  by  Eg.  Hunnius  [Ser.  2,  p. 
19).  "0  how  many  people  there  are  who  sigh 
after  the  precious  gospel  and  have  willingly 
gone  in  crowds  over  many  miles  to  the  places, 
where  alone  they  could  obtain  and  enjoy  it. 
These  will  on  that  day  stand  up  and  condemn 
those,  who  have  had  it  at  their  very  doors,  and 
yet  have  regarded  it  so  disdainfully  and  treated 
it  so  carelessly."  Eg.  Hunnius,  Ser.  2,  p.  20. 

8.  Ver.  5.  "  God  has,  on  account  of  Zion's 
sins,  set  her  enemies  in  authority  over  her. 
What  does  not  this  signify  !  The  enemy  governs 
at  pleasure  !  Thus  the  church  must  be  trodden 
under  foot  by  the  world — and  this  drives  her 
anew  to  penitence  and  prayer.  The  youth  must 
go  bound  into  slavery.  To  be  obliged  to  see  this, 
breaks  the  heart.  He  who  will  not  understand 
that  it  is  the  enemy  of  souls,  who  leads  the  chil- 
dren, bound  by  lusts  and  false  doctrine,  to  hell, 
that  person  must  regard  evei'y  thing  tliat  he  re- 
flects upon  in  a  gross  and  literal  sense."     Died- 

RICH. 

9.  Ver.  5.  "The  devil  is  the  autlior  of  our 
spiritual  captivity  (Col.  i.  13  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  l^ij), 
Christ  is  our  Redeemer  (John  viii.  3G),  the  mtans 
of  redemption  are — in  respect  to  the  price  paid 
[vsii'ioxiQ  acquisitionis)  the  blood  of  Christ  (Zech. 
ix.  11 ;  Col.  i.  14J, — but  with  regard  to  its  actual 
application  to  us  (respectu  a,utem  ezhibitionis)  the 
Word  and  Sacraments,  especially  Baptism  which 
by  St.  Basil,  in  his  Homily  on  'Holy  Baptism,' 
is  called  'the  ransom  for  captives^  (Isa.  Ixi.  1)." 

FORSTER. 

10.  Ver.  5.  Forster  here  considers  the  ques- 
tion, how  the  participation  of  children  in  the 
sufi'erings  of  their  parents  for  sins  of  which  the 
children  are  innocent,  may  be  explained.  He 
refers  in  this  connection  to  Luther's  explanation 
of  Ex.  XX.  5,  where  it  is  said:  "This  question, 
why  the  son  suffers  for  the  father,  the  prophet 
Ezekiel  hath  treated  of  and  says  (xviii.  2),  'The 
fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  chil- 
dren's teeth  are  set  on  edge  ;'  and  Jeremiah  saya 
(xxxi.  29?),  "Our  fathers  have  sinned  and  are 
gone,  but  we  must  suffer  for  their  sins ;' — and  it 
is  still  so  in  our  days;  we  sin  and  deserve  what 
those  who  come  after  us  must  suffer.  We  are 
not  to  understand  by  this  that  the  child  is  damned 
on  account  of  the  father,  as  if  it  referred  to  the 
[eternal]  punishment  of  souls.  'AH  souls,'  says 
God  by  Ezekiel  (xviii.  4),  'are  mine:  as  the  soul 
of  the  father,  so  also  the  soul  of  the  son  is  mine ; 
the  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die.'  But  we  should 
understand  this  of  temporal  punishment;  He 
punishes  children  on  account  of  the  fathers,  by 
letting  them  die  who  must  yet  at  any  rate  die." 


64 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


11.  Ver.  5.  For  the  multitude  of  her  trans- 
gressions.— "  If  thou  fearest  not  sin,  fear  at 
least    that   which    sin   leads   to."  Augustin    by 

FORSTER. 

12.  Ver.  6.  Her  princes  have  become  like 
harts,  etc. — "  The  deer  is  an  extremely  timid 
animal,  and  on  that  account  the  heart  of  a  deer 
is  reproachfully  imputed  to  the  timid,  as  appears 
by  this  verse  of  Homer:  "0  son  of  Atreus, 
having  dog's  eyes  and  the  heart  of  a  stag.'  And 
the  Apothegm  of  Philip  of  Macedon  from  Sto- 
B.EUS  is  well  known  :  'an  army  of  stags  with  a 
lion  for  a  leader,  were  better  than  an  army  of 
lions  with  a  stag  for  a  leader.'  "   Forsteb. 

13.  Ver.  6.  All  her  beauty  is  departed.  -- 
"Now  they  will  consider  well  the  mercies  of  the 
Lord  they  formerly  possessed,  and  how  little  they 
had  valued  them.  Such  reflections  God  awakens 
by  means  of  affliction,  and  herein  again  is  mercy, 
though    enjoyed   only   in   the   midst  of  tears." 

DiEDRICH. 

14.  Ver.  7.  And  did  mock  at  her  Sab- 
baths.— "  A  corresponding  punishment  (poena 
avTiaTpo(pog)  answers,  by  the  just  judgment  of  God, 
to  the  sin  of  Sabbath  profanation;  viz.,  the  de- 
rision of  the  Sabbath  (comp.  Gregor.  Nazianz. 
The  festivals  of  the  people  become  the  door  of 
sins)."  FoRSTER.  [Adam  Clarke:  "  The  Jews 
were  despised  by  the  heathen  for  keeping  the  Sab- 
bath.    Juvenal  mocks  them  on  that  account: 

Cni  septima  quwque  fuit  lux 
Ignava  et  partem  vitse  non  attigit  ullam.  Sat.  V. 

♦  To  whom  every  seventh  day  was  a  blank  and 
formed  not  any  part  of  their  life.'  St.  Adgustin 
represents  Seneca  as  doing  the  same: — Inutiliter 
id  eos  facere  affirmans,  quod  septimani  fermfe 
partem  setatis  suae  perdent  vacando,  et  multa  in 
tempore  urgentia,  non  agendo  loedantur.  '  That 
they  lost  the  seventh  part  of  their  life  in  keep- 
ing their  Sabbaths ;  and  injured  themselves  by 
abstaining  from  the  performance  of  many  neces- 
sary things  in  such  times.'  He  did  not  consider 
that  the  Roman  calendar  and  customs  gave  them 
many  more  idle  days  than  God  had  prescribed  in 
Sabbaths  to  the  Jews."] 

15.  Ver.  7.  Jerusalem  remembered. — 
Sinning  lir.^t  and  remembering  afterwards  has 
brought  many  into  great  trouble. 

1(3.  Ver.  8.  Jerusalem  hath  grievously- 
sinned. — "  We,  Jerusalem,  must  suffer  on  ac- 
count of  our  sins,  and  this  chiefly  makes  our  sor- 
rows so  very  bitter :  sin  is  the  sting  of  death  and 
of  every  evil."  Diedricii.  [Calvin:  "  Here  the 
Prophet  expresses  more  clearly  and  strongly 
what  he  had  briefly  referred  to,  even  that  all  the 
evil  which  the  Jews  suffered  proceeded  from 
God's  vengeance,  and  that  they  were  worthy  of 
Buch  a  punishment,  because  they  had  not  lightly 
oft'ended,  but  had  heaped  up  for  themselves  a 
dreadful  judgment,  since  they  had  in  all  manner 
of  ways  abandoned  themselves  to  impiety.  It  is 
common  to  all  to  mourn  in  adversities;  but  the 
end  of  the  moui-ning  of  the  unbelieving  is  per- 
verseness,  which  at  length  breaks  out  into  rage, 
wlien  they  feel  their  evils,  and  they  do  not  in  the 
meantime  humble  themselves  before  God.  But 
the  faithful  do  not  harden  themselves  in  their 
mourning,  but  reflect  on  themselves  and  examine 
their  own  life,  and  of  tlieir  own  accord  prostrate 


themselves  before  God,  and  willingly  submit  t) 
tlie  sentence  of  condemnation,  and  confess  that 
God  is  just."] 

17.  Ver.  9.  [Her  filthiness  is  in  her  skirts. 
— "Much  of  the  Jewish  law  is  employed  in  dis- 
criminating between  things  clean  and  unclean  ; 
in  removing  and  making  atonement  for  things 
polluted  or  prescribed:  and  under  these  cere- 
monies, as  under  a  veil  or  covering,  a  meaning 
the  most  important  and  sacred  is  concealed,  as 
would  be  apparent  from  the  nature  of  them,  even 
if  we  had  not,  besides,  other  clear  and  explicit 
authority  for  this  opinion.  Among  the  rest  are 
certain  diseases  and  infirmities  of  the  body.  *  *  * 
The  sacred  poets  sometimes  have  recourse  to  these 
topics  for  imagery,  even  on  the  most  momentous 
occasions,  when  they  display  the  general  de- 
pravity inherent  in  the  human  mind  (Isa.  Ixiv. 
0),  or  exprobate  the  corrupt  manners  of  their 
own  people  (Isa.  i.  5,  6,  16;  Ez.  xxxvi.  17),  or 
when  they  deplore  the  abject  state  of  the  virgin, 
the  daughter  of  Sion,  polluted  and  exposed  (Lam. 
i.  8,  9,  17  ;  ii.  2).  If  we  consider  these  meta- 
phors without  any  reference  to  the  religion  of 
their  authors,  they  will  doubtless  appear  in  some 
degree  disgusting  and  inelegant;  if  we  refer 
them  to  their  genuine  source,  to  the  peculiar 
rites  of  the  Hebrews,  they  will  be  found  wanting 
neither  in  force  nor  in  dignity."  Lowth:  Sacred 
Poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  Lee.    VIII.'\ 

18.  Ver.  9.  She  remembereth  not  her 
last  end.  —  "It  is  a  peculiarity  of  sin,  that  while 
it  may  rest  a  long  time  in  a  man's  heart  without 
disturbing  him,  yet  whenever  God  begins  to  show 
His  wrath,  it  wakes  up  and  stings  as  a  serpent 
and  makes  a  wound  that  no  one  can  heal  (Eccle- 
siasticus  xxi.  2).  It  would  be  well  for  us  to  re- 
flect, when  the  devil  makes  sin  as  sweet  as  honey, 
that  there  may  be  poison  concealed  in  it."  Cra- 
mer by  Eg.  Hunnius  {Ser.  III.,  p.  27).  ["  My 
son,  hast  thou  sinned?  Do  so  no  more,  but  ask 
pardon  for  thy  former  sins.  Flee  from  sin  as 
from  the  face  of  a  serpent ;  for  if  thou  comest 
too  near  it,  it  will  bite  thee:  the  teeth  thereof 
are  as  the  teeth  of  a  lion,  slaying  the  sotils  of  men. 
All  iniquity  is  as  a  two-edged  sword,  the  wounds 
whereof  cannot  be  healed."  Ecclesiasticus  xxi. 
1-3.] 

19.  Ver.  10.  "  If  we  have  failed  to  keep  dili- 
gently the  gates  of  our  heart  and  through  some 
one  of  our  senses  lying  open  the  old  enemy  have 
found  entrance,  he  advances  thence  by  means  of 
depraved  suggestions  and  illicit  lusts  into  the 
very  sanctuary  of  our  soul,  where  the  Holy 
Trinity  used  to  dwell  by  means  of  true  faith,  and 
he  despoils  that  sanctuary  of  the  wisdom  and 
virtues  that  beautify  and  embellish  it,  and  we 
become  miserable  and  most  deserving  of  being 
overwhelmed  with  shame."  RiiABAN.  Maurcs 
by  GnisLER.  p.  36. 

20.  Vers.  8-10.  "Not  the  person,  but  the  doc- 
trine sanctifies  a  place,  much  less  tan  a  place 
sanctify  the  person  and  the  doctrine.  To  which  ia 
pertinent  that  saying  of  Jeko.me  in  his  Epistle  to 
Heliodorus, — '  It  is  not  easy  to  stand  in  the  jilace 
of  Paul  and  to  hold  the  rank  of  Peter,  both  of 
whom  reign  with  Christ.'  Whence  it  is  said, — 
'  They  are  not  the  sons  of  the  saints  who  occupy 
the  places  of  the  saints,  but  those  who  do  their 
works.'     Wherefore  if  Jerusalem,  the  holiest  of 


CHAP.  I. 


66 


all  cities  in  the  judgment  of  God  Himself,  is 
nevertheless  declared  in  our  text  to  be  the  wick- 
edest of  all  cities,  who  will  not  rather  say  this 
of  the  city  of  Rome,  which  to-day,  all  the  world 
knows,  is  the  abyss  of  superstitions  and  of  all 
possible  abominations."  Fohster. 

21.  Ver.  11.  See,  O  Lord,  and  consider: 
for  I  am  become  vile. — "The  righteous  are 
oppressed  in  the  church  that  they  may  cry  out. 
they  cry  that  they  may  be  heard,  they  are  heard 
that  they  may  glorify  God."  Augustin  by 
FoESTEK.  [Calvin:  "We  said  yesterday,  that 
the  complaiuts  which  humbled  the  faithful,  and, 
at  the  same  time,  raised  them  to  a  good  hope,  and 
also  opened  the  door  to  prayers,  were  dictated  by 
the  Spirit  of  God.  Otherwise,  when  men  indulge 
in  grief,  and  torment  themselves,  they  become 
exasperated ;  and  then  to  be  kindled  by  this  irri- 
tation is  a  kind  of  madness.  The  Prophet,  there- 
fore, in  order  to  moderate  the  intensity  of  sorrow, 
and  the  raging  of  impatience,  recalls  again  the 
faithful  to  prayer.  And  when  Jerusalem  asks 
God  to  see  and  to  look,  there  is  an  emphasis  in- 
tended in  using  the  two  words  ;  and  the  reason 
given  does  also  more  fully  show  this,  because  she 
had  become  vile  ;  so  that  the  church  set  nothing 
else  before  God,  to  turn  Him  to  mercy,  but  her 
own  miseries.  She  did  not,  then,  bring  forward  her 
own  services,  but  only  deplored  her  own  miseries, 
in  order  that  she  might  obtain  the  favor  of 
God."] 

22.  [Ver.  12.  Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye 
that  pass  by?  behold  and  see  if  there  be 
any  sorrow  like  unto  my  sorrow,  w^hich 
is  done  unto  Me. — Henry:  "She  justly  de- 
mands a  share  in  the  pity  and  compassion  of 
spectators.  How  pathetically  does  she  beg  their 
compassion !  ver.  18.  This  is  like  that  of  Job, 
xix.  21.  Have  pity,  have  pity  upon  me,  0  ye  my 
friends!  It  helps  to  make  a  burden  sit  lighter, 
if  our  friends  sympathize  with  us,  and  mingle  their 
tears  with  ours ;  for  this  evinces  that,  though  in 
aflaiction,  we  are  not  in  contempt,  commonly  as 
much  dreaded  as  anything  in  an  aflaiction."] 

23.  Ver.  12.  "This  is  allegorically  expounded 
to  be  the  voice  of  Christ  hanging  on  the  cross,  or 
of  souls  in  Purgatory.  *  *  *  Or  it  is  the  voice  of 
the  church  in  tribulation.  *  *  *  Of  the  same  na- 
ture is  the  anguish  of  the  mother  when  in  labor, 
or  mourning  her  dead  children,  or  dreading 
separation  from  her  husband,  or  carried  captive 
with  her  children  among  enemies.  *  *  *  It  is 
the  voice  of  the  truly  penitent  soul,  for  there  is 
no  greater  desolation  than  separation  from  God." 
BoNAVENTURA  by  Ghisler.  pp.  41,  42. 

24.  [Ver.  12.  Henderson:  "The  words  of 
this  verse  have  been  very  generally  applied,  in 
the  language  of  the  pulpit,  to  the  suflferings  of 
our  Saviour,  and  unquestionably  they  graphi- 
cally describe  the  intensity  of  those  suflferings; 
but  considering  the  extent  to  which  the  original 
sense  of  the  passage  has  been  lost  sight  of,  and 
the  accommodated  one  substituted  in  its  room, 
it  would  be  well  to  notify  that  the  secondary 
meaning  is  merely  an  accommodation  of  the 
words."  Wordsworth:  "This  sorrowful  ex- 
clamation may,  in  a  secondary  and  spiritual  sense, 
be  regarded  as  coming  from  the  lips  of  Christ 
on  the  cross,  bewailing  the  sins  and  miseries  of 
the  world,  which  caused  Him  that  bitter  anguish,  | 

5 


of  which  alone  it  could  be  properly  said,  '  that 
no  sorrow  was  like  unto  His  sorrow.'"  Thus 
George  Herbert,  in  "  The  Sacrifice:" 

"  Oh  all  ye,  who  pasa  by,  whose  eyes  and  mind 
To  worldly  things  arc  sharp,  but  to  Me  blind, 
To  Me,  who  took  eyes  that  I  might  you  find : 
Was  ever  grief  like  Mine  ? 

But  now  I  die ;  now  all  is  finished. 

My  wo,  man's  weal :  and  now  I  bow  My  head : 

Only  let  others  say,  when  I  am  dead, 

Never  was  grief  like  Mine." — W.  H.  H.] 

25.  Ver.  12.  "Our  Saviour  could  have  used 
this  apostrophe  on  the  day  of  the  preparation  for 
the  Passover,  which  might  without  impropriety 
be  called,  in  the  very  words  of  this  text,  the  day 
of  the  wrath  and  indignation  of  the  Lord,  inas- 
much as  on  that  day  He  poured  out  His  wrath  as 
if  by  a  sudden  impulse,  on  His  own  Son,  in  ac 
cordance  with  the  testimony  of  Isa.  liii.  Speak- 
ing briefly:  the  suffering  of  Christ  was  infinite 
and  infernal  in  regard  to  its  atrocity,  though  not 
with  regard  to  its  duration;  and  this  should  be 
urged  in  refutation  of  the  frivolous,  carping  ob- 
jection of  the  disciples  of  Photinus,  who  with 
most  impious  sophistry  assert,  that  the  passion 
of  Christ,  because  not  eternal,  could  not  be  ex- 
piatory of  sins  which  are  infinite  in  guilt. 
Preachers  ought  to  and  can,  by  means  of  this 
prophetical  exhortation,  stimulate  their  hearers 
to  more  attentive  meditation  on  the  Lord's  pas- 
sion."   FORSTEB. 

26.  Ver.  12.  "Zion's  sorrow  exceeds  all  other 
sorrow,  for  Zion  is  fully  sensible  of  the  nature 
of  her  sin, — which  is  the  sin  of  a  horrible  rebel 
lion  against  God  Himself: — and,  at  the  same 
time,  she  feels  for  the  lost  sinners,  who  were 
called  by  her  word  and  whom  she  could  have 
wished  to  see  not  lost.  Zion's  sorrow  is  fulfilled 
and  completely  realized  in  Jesus  Christ,  of  Him 
have  the  prophets,  and  all  saints,  and  all  who 
are  His,  interpreted  it, — these  know  only  Christ. 
He  who  inflicts  the  sorrow  is  God  the  Father, 
and  He  who  bears  it,  in  the  fullest  sense,  is  the 
Son  of  God  "  DiEDRiCH. 

27.  [Ver.  13.  Pool:  "  The  holy  man  owneth 
God  as  the  first  cause  of  all  the  evil  they  suflfered, 
and  entitles  God  to  their  various  kinds  of  aflBic- 
tions,  both  in  captivity  and  during  the  siege, 
looking  beyond  the  Babylonians,  who  were  the 
proximate  instrumental  cause."] 

28.  Ver.  14.  "Although  it  may  have  the  ap- 
pearance of  wrath,  that  God  should  punish  the 
Jewish  people  so  severely  with  servitude,  famine, 
disgrace  and  the  contempt  of  their  enemies,  yet 
thereby  God  promoted  their  eternal  benefit,  since 
many  of  them  were  brought  by  these  means  to  a 
knowledge  of  their  sins  they  had  not  other- 
wise attained.  Moreover,  God  does  many  a 
'strange  work'  (Isa.  xxviii.  21),  in  reference  to 
that,  which  He  esteems  His  own.  Example, 
Majjasseh."  Cramer  by  Eg.  Hunnius  [Ser. 
III.,  pp.  28,  29).— "Oh!  how  salutary  is  the 
blow,  when  God  punishes  a  man  for  his  sins  here 
in  this  life,  and  by  such  temporal  punishment 
preserves  him  from  the  future  eternal  and  terri- 
ble wrath  of  God  and  from  unquenchable  Hell- 
fiie  !  Thus  that  holy  teacher  Augustin  speaks,  in 
Ids  Confessions:  Lord,  burn  me  here,  saw  me  in 
pieces  here,  pierce  me  here,  stone  nie  here.  Only 
spare  me  in  that  world."  Eg.  Hunnius,  id.  loc. 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


29.  Ver.  14.  "  Punishment  daily  increases  be- 
cause guilt  increases  daily.  AuGUSTiN.  Sins  be- 
cause they  excite  the  wrath  of  God,  which  is  an 
intolerable  burden  (Prayer  of  Manass.,  ver.  5), 
are  themselves  well  called,  and  are,  a  yoke  and 
an  intolerable  burden  (Vi^.  xxxviii.  4;  Ixv.  4)." 
FoiisTER.  ["  My  transgressions,  0  Lord,  are 
multiplied:  My  transgressions  are  multiplied, 
and  I  am  not  worthy  to  behold  and  see  the  height 
of  Heaven,  for  the  multitude  of  mine  iniquities. 
/  am  boived  down  ivith  many  iron  hands,  that  I  can- 
not lift  up  mine  head,  neither  have  any  release:  for 
I  have  provoked  Thy  wrath,  and  done  evil  before 
Thee;  I  did  not  Thy  will,  neither  kept  I  Thy 
couimandments  :  I  have  set  up  abominations,  and 
have  multiplied  offences."  (The  Prayer  of 
.Ma.nasseh.) — Henry:  "We  never  are  entangled 
;  1  any  yoke,  but  what  is  framed  out  of  our  own 
I ,  ansgressions.  The  yoke  of  Christ's  commands 
:-;  ;m  easy  yoke,  Matt.  ix.  30;  that  of  our  own 
1  ransgressions  a  heavy  one:  God  is  said  to  bind 
I  his  yoke,  and  nothing  but  the  hand  of  His  par- 
doning mercy  will  unbind  it."] 

30.  Vers.  12-15.  "We  should  observe  here, 
what  is  the  real  source  of  all  tribulation  and  ad- 
versity on  earth;  namely,  not  blind  chance,  not 
celestial  agencies,  not  men,  who  err  in  their 
opinions,  or  cause  misfortunes  through  wanton- 
ness or  malice :  in  these  we  may  find  a  secondary 
cause,  but  the  highest  cause,  which  should  be 
first  and  most  considered,  is  God.  The  Lord, 
says  Jeremiah,  has  filled  me  full  of  grief;  He  has 
sent  from  on  high  a  fire  into  my  bones;  the  Lord 
has  so  severely  handled  me  that  I  am  not  able  to 
rise  up.  The  Lord  Himself  freely  confesses  all 
this  and  says,  'Is  there  evil  in  the  city,  which  I, 
the  Lord,  have  not  done?'  (Am.  iii.  6).  There- 
fore if  we  would  escape  evil,  we  must  go  to  no 
one  but  God,  and  see  to  it  that  we  are  reconciled 
with  Him  in  regard  to  our  sins.  Wtirtemb.:  Sum- 
mar." — [Scott  :  "  It  may  properly  be  inquired  of 
all  that  pass  by,  whether  the  suffering  of  the 
people  of  God  be  nothing  to  them  ?  If  they  have 
no  thought  of  compassionating  or  attempting  to 
alleviate  their  distresses,  they  may  at  least  be- 
hold and  be  instructed:  they  may  see  in  them  the 
holiness  of  God,  the  evil  of  sin,  the  emptiness  of 
forms,  the  fatal  effects  of  hypocrisy  and  impiety: 
and  they  may  take  warning  to  flee  from  the 
wrath  to  come,  by  considering  the  temporal 
miseries  to  which  sin  exposes  men  in  this  world, 
'  For  if  the  righteous  scarcely  are  saved,  where 
will  the  ungodly  and  profligate  appear?'  If  the 
rod  of  correction  be  so  terrible,  what  will  the 
sword  of  vengeance  be  ? — But  whatever  may  be 
learned  by  viewing  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem, 
*  *  *  far  more  may  be  learned  from  looking 
unto  Jesus,  and  His  sufferings  and  death.  Does 
He  not,  as  it  were  from  the  cross,  call  on  every 
heedless  mortal  to  attend  to  the  scene  ?  Does 
He  not  say,  'Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that 
pass  by  ?  Behold  and  see  if  there  be  any  sorrow 
like  unto  My  sorrow,  wherewith  the  Lord  hath 
afflicted  Me,  in  the  day  of  His  fierce  anger  against 
the  sins  of  those  whom  I  came  to  seek  and  save  ? 
Is  it  nothing  to  you  that  I  am  here  a  sinless  suf- 
ferer? That  I,  the  well-beloved  Son  of  the 
Father,  am  consumed  by  the  fire  of  His  wrath, 
and  that  My  heart  in  the  midst  of  my  bowels  is 
even  as  melting  wax,  and   all  my  bones  out  of 


joint,  and  that  mine  enemies  stand  staring  on 
and  insulting  over  Me?  Is  it  nothing  to  you 
that  the  Father  hath  wreathed  on  My  neck  the 
yoke  of  man's  transgressions,  and  laid  on  Me  the 
iniquity  of  all  His  jieople?'  I  say,  doth  not  our 
suffering  Immanuel  seem  thus  to  address  us? 
And  does  it  not  behoove  us  to  consider,  who  this 
Sufferer  was,  what  He  suffered,  and  why  He  suf- 
fered at  all?  Here  we  may  see  the  evil  of  sin, 
the  honor  of  the  law,  and  the  justice  of  God,  more 
than  in  all  the  other  scenes  that  we  have  been 
contemplating  :  here  we  may  learn  the  worth  of 
our  souls,  the  importance  of  eternal  things,  the 
vanity  of  the  world,  and  the  misery  of  fallen 
man.  Here  we  may  see  the  only  foundation  of 
our  hope,  and  the  source  of  our  comfort  and 
happiness.  Here  we  may  learn  gratitude  and 
patience,  meekness  and  mercy,  from  the  brightest 
example  and  the  most  endearing  motives.  Let 
then  all  our  sorrows  lead  u;?  to  contemplate  the 
cross  of  Christ,  and  to  mai'k  the  way  He  took 
through  sufferings  and  death  to  His  glory  ;  that 
we  maybe  comforted  under  our  trials,  and  cheer- 
fully follow  our  Fore-runner,  that  where  He  is, 
there  we  may  be  also."] 

31.  [Ver.  16.  Because  the  Comforter  that 
should  relieve  my  soul  is  far  from  me. — 
The  church  suffering  for  her  actual  sins  becomes 
a  type  of  the  Saviour  suffering  for  the  sins  of  the 
church  iniputatively.  Here  we  have  another  cry 
from  the  cross.  "  Eloi,  Eloi,  lama  sabachtliair . 
My  God,  My  God,  why  hast  Thou  forsaken  Me  ?" 
Those  who  forsake  God  will  be  forsaken  of  Him, 
and  those  who  are  forsaken  of  God,  will  seek  in 
vain  for  any  other  comforter,  and  will  be  left  to 
cry  out  with  tears  and  lamentations  and  '  spread 
forth  their  hands,'  ver.  17,  in  vain,  because 
'  there  is  none  to  comfort '  them.  The  constant 
allusion  to  an  absent  Comforter  in  this  Song,  see 
vers.  2,  9,  16,  17,  21,  is  significant.  There  is 
nothing  like  it  in  the  other  Songs  of  Lamenta- 
tion.—W.  H.  H.] 

32.  Ver.  17.  Zion  spreadeth  forth  her 
hands,  and  there  is  none  to  comfort  her. 
— "She  receives  compensatory  puni.shment,  in 
that,  having  refused  to  hear  Him,  who  stretched 
out  His  hands  (Isa.  Ixv.  2),  and  to  seek  safety 
under  His  wings  (Matt,  xxiii.  37),  she  herself 
should  afterwards  stretch  out  her  hands  and  not 
find  a  comforter."  Ambrose  by  Ghisler.  p.  53. — 
'•  The  ancient  church  (Sion)  spreadeth  forth  her 
hands,  i.  e.,  her  legal  works  and  carnal  righteous- 
nesses, but  there  is  none  to  comfort  her  on  account 
of  those  works,  for  the  Lord  does  not  justify  her 
through  them.  But  what  [is  the  result  of  this 
exhibition  of  her  good  works]  ?  If  slie  expects 
to  be  justified  by  spreading  out  her  hands  after 
this  fashion,  God  hath  com?nanded  that  her  adver- 
saries, i.  e.,  her  sins,  should  be  round  about  her, 
and  her  sins  are  much  more  numerous,  nay  with- 
out comparison,  innumerable,  and  her  thousand 
justifications  are  as  if  she  were  an  unclean  wo- 
man, as  a  prophet  elsewhere  testifies,  when  he 
says :  '  But  we  are  all  as  an  unclean  thing,  and 
all  our  righteousnesses  are  as  filthy  rags  '  (Isa. 
Ixiv.  6)."    RuPERTUS  Abbas  by  Ghisler.  p.  54. 

33.  Ver.  18.  "  It  is  an  ingenious  and  con- 
siderate method  of  discipline,  when  the  good  God 
would  make  us  better  and  wiser,  not  by  words, 
but  by  examples  in  other   persons.      Happy  arc 


CHAP.  I. 


they,  who  become  wise  thus  by  the  misfortunes 
of  others."  Cramer. — The  Lord  is  righteous. 
*'  Here  recurs  a  common  saying,  to  vvhicli  the 
church  bears  her  most  illustrious  testimony,  in 
the  ^::une  way  as  Mauritius  the  General,  when 
about  to  be  beheaded,  is  said  to  have  pronounced 
publicly  those  words  from  Ps.  cxix.  :  '  Just  art 
Tliou,  0  Lord,  and  just  are  Thy  judgments.' 
FoRSTKR.  [The  Mauritius  referred  to  is  Mauri- 
tius Tiberius,  sometimes  called  St.  Maurice, 
tliough  not  the  Saint  usually  so  designated.  Be- 
fore lie  himself  was  beheaded,  his  five  sons  were 
massacred  before  his  eyes;  "and  Maurice,  hum- 
bling himself  under  the  hand  of  God,  was  heard 
to  excl.iim,  '  Thou  art  just,  0  Lord,  and  Thy 
judgments  are  without  partiality.'  "[Encyc.  Brit.) 
— W.  H.  H.] 

34.  Ver.  19.  I  caUed  for  my  lovers,  but 
they  deceived  me. — ■'  Under  God's  judgments 
we  tirst  learn,  how  foolish  it  was  ever  to  have 
expected  anything  good  from  the  world,  to  which 
we  paid  our  earliest  court,  as  Judah  to  Egypt, 
and  from  the  Princes  of  the  world.  The;/  have  be- 
trai/ed  me,  is  ever  said  of  all  nations,  whenever  the 
church  has  relied  upon  the  great  ones  of  a  nation 
as  such.  The  world  is  the  church's  field,  which 
bears  thistles  and  thorns.  Those  who  trust  to  the 
world  must  come  eventually  lo  beggary,  and  thus 
miserably  prolong  their  lives  ;  whereby  they  may 
possibly  recover  their  senses."  Diedrich. 

3-5.  Vers.  20-22.  "Here  the  question  occurs, 
whether  we  may  pray  against  our  enemies,  since 
Christ  says,  'Love  your  enemies'  (Matt.  v.  44)? 
Answer  :  There  are  two  kinds  of  enemies.  Some, 
who  bear  ill-will  towards  us  personally  for  pri- 
vate reasons,  concern  ourselves  alone.  When  the 
matter  extends  no  further  than  lo  our  own  per- 
son, then  should  we  privately  commend  it  to 
God,  and  pray  for  those  who  are  ill-disposed  to- 
wards us,  that  God  would  bring  them  to  a  sense 
of  their  sin;  and,  besides,  we  ought,  according 
to  the  injunction  of  Christ,  to  do  them  good,  an(t 
not  return  evil  for  evil,  but  rather  overcome  evil 
with  good  (Rom.  xii.  17,  21).  But  if  our  ene- 
mies are  of  that  sort,  that  they  bear  ill-will  to 
wards  us,  not  for  any  private  cause,  but  on  ac- 
count of  matters  of  faith  ;  aiul  are  also  opposed, 
not  only  to  us,  but  especially  to  God  in  Heaven, 
are  fighting  against  His  holj'  Word  and  are  striv- 
ing with  eager  impiety  to  destroy  the  Christian 
church; — then  indeed  should  we  pray  that  God 
would  convert  those  who  may  be  converted,  but 
as  for  those  who  continue  ever  to  rage,  stub- 
bornly and  maliciously,  against  God  and  His 
church,  that  God  would  execute  upon  them  ac- 
cording to  His  own  sentence  judgment  and  right- 
eousness (Ps.  cxxxix.  19)."  Cramer  by  Eg.  Hun- 
Nius  {Ser.   III.,  p.  36).  • 

36.  Ver.  20.  [Behold,  O  Lord.— Calvin  : 
"The  people  turn  again  to  pray  to  God:  and 
what  has  been  before  said  ought  to  be  remem- 
bered, that  these  lamentations  of  Jeremiah  differ 
from  the  complaints  of  the  ungodly;  because  the 
faithful  first  acknowledge  that  they  are  justly 
chastised  by  God's  hand,  and  secondly,  they 
trust  in  His  mercy  and  implore  His  aid.  For  by 
these  two  marks  the  church  is  distinguished  from 
the  unbelieving,  even  by  repentance  and  faith."] 
— Fori  am  in  distress.  "Such  is  the  dis- 
tress which  ari&"s  from  a  disturbed  conscience, 


of  which  Ambrosius  says  (Lib.  I.,  ep.  18),  There 
is  no  greater  pain  than  that  whicli  wounds  the 
conscience  with  the  sting  of  sin."  Forstkr. — 
[Abroad  the  sword  bereaveth,  at  home 
there  is  as  death.  Hugh  Broughton:  "Dent, 
xxxii.  They  shall  be  brent  with  hunger  and 
eaten  up  with  burning  and  bitter  destruction: 
without,  the  sword  shall  rot;  within  shall  be 
fear.  St.  Paul,  2  Cor.  vii.  6,  calletli  Moses  and 
Jeremy  both  into  mind,  saying  when  we  came 
into  Macedonia  my  flesh  had  no  rest,  we  were 
always  in  distress,  without  was  fighting,  within 
was  fear.  Thus  divinely  honoreth  he  the  Songs 
of  Moses  and  Jeremy,  as  having  their  words  still 
before  him,  joining  Moses'  prophecy  with  Jere- 
my's story,  and  showing  how  the  Apostles  were 
vexed  in  the  world,  as  Jerusalem  of  the  Chal- 
deans."] 

37.  Ver.  21.  Thou  hast  done  it.— "It  is 
most  worthy  of  observation,  that  the  church  in 
tills  prayer  having  turned  towards  God  openly 
declares.  Thou  hast  done  it.  Whence  it  is  plainly 
to  be  inferred  that  all  calamities  are  sent  by  God 

(li^eOTe/f77TO<)."    FORSTER. 

38.  Vers.  21,  22.  "  0  that  God  would  let  this 
day  come  soon,  in  which  the  discipline  of  His 
children  has  an  end  and  the  flames  of  God's  wrath 
shall  consume  the  rods  of  His  chastisement  for- 
ever! Then,  in  truth,  our  sins  and  the  Devil 
will  be  once  for  all  under  our  feet,  and  the  whole 
world,  which  now  vexes  us,  will  descend  into  the 
abyss  with  howling  and  shrieks.  In  the  heart 
of  the  Prophet,  speaks  also  the  Christ,  who  judges 
the  world  and  will  make  it  His  footstool :  and  if 
we  are  really  Christians,  then  we  have,  at  the 
same  time  and  in  full  measure,  both  sorrows  and 
confidence ;  yet  often  the  sense  of  sorrow  ex- 
ceeds, so  that  we  say,  my  sighs  are  many  and  my 
heart  is  faint.  But  these  sighs  will  be  turned  into 
joy  (John  xvi.  20-22),  for  they  are  the  birth- 
throes  of  the  new  life  and  of  the  eternal  world. 
Happy  is  he  who  has  a  part  therein."  Diedrich. 

39.  Ver.  22.  "Although  our  prayer  is  not  a 
work  of  merit  on  account  of  which  God  should 
hear  us,  yet  it  is  a  means  by  which  we  are  heard 
(Matt.  vii.  7)."  Cramer. — [Calvin:  "We,  in 
short,  see  that  the  faithful  lay  humbly  their 
prayers  before  God,  and  at  the  same  time  con- 
fess that  what  they  had  deserved  was  rendered 
to  them,  only  they  set  before  God  their  extreme 
sorrow,  straits,  griefs,  tears,  and  sighs.  Then 
the  way  of  pacifying  God  is,  sincerely  to  confess 
that  we  are  justly  visited  by  His  juagment,  and 
also  to  lie  down  as  it  were  confounded,  and  at 
the  same  time  to  venture  to  look  up  to  Him,  and 
to  rely  on  His  mercy  with  confidence." — Hugh 
Broughton:  "The  first  alphabet  row  is  ended  in 
the  prophecy  of  ending  the  wicked  kingdoms 
which  should  be  brought  under  Babel's  yoke,  to 
show  that  all  these  troubles  are  in  God's  Provi- 
dence settled  in  the  most  exquisite  order  for  His 
judgments."] 

40.  [Prayer.  "Grant,  Almighty  God,  that  as 
Thou  hast  hitherto  dealt  so  mercifully  with  us, 
we  may  anticipate  Thy  dreadful  judgment;  and 
that  if  Thou  shouldest  more  severely  chastise  us, 
we  may  not  yet  fail,  but  that  being  humbled  un- 
der Thy  mighty  hand,  we  may  flee  to  Thy  mercy 
and  cherish  this  hope  iu  our  hearts,  that  Thou 
wilt  be  a  Father  to  us,  and  not  hesitate   to  call 


68 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


continually  on  Thee,  until,  being  freed  from  all 
evils,  we  shall  at  length  be  gathered  into  Thy 
celestial  kingdom,  which  Thine  only-begotten 
Son  has  procured  for  us  by  His  own  blood. 
Amen."  Calvin.] 

HOMILETICAL   AND   PRACTICAL. 

1.  Vers.  1-11.  On  a  fast-day,  a  church  conse- 
cration, a  festival  in  commemoration  of  the 
Reformation,  at  a  Synod,  or  on  similar  occasions 
prompting  to  earnest  warning,  the  congregation 
could  be  instructed,  on  the  ground  of  this  text, 
that  the  judgment  which  befell  the  Old  Testament 
Zion  by  means  of  the  Chaldeans  is  a  wamiw;  exam- 
ple to  the  New  Testament  Zion.  In  doing  so,  it 
would  be  proper  to  consider:  1.  The  original 
glory  of  the  Old  Testament  Zion,  ver.  7  a.  2. 
Her  presumptuous  security  and  temerity,  ver.  9 
a.  3.  The  wickedness  that  became  prevalent  in 
consequence  thereof,  vers.  5  6,  8  a.  4.  The  judg- 
ment of  God,  for  that  wickedness,  in  its  details; 
intrusion  of  enemies,  ver.  10,  desolation  of  the 
city,  ver.  1,  captivity  of  the  people  and  of  the 
Priests  and  Princes,  vers.  3-6,  discontinuance  of 
public  worship,  ver.  10,  famine,  ver.  11,  triumph 
of  enemies,  vers.  5,  7,  9,  disgrace  and  misery  of 
the  people,  vers.  1,  2,  3,  5,  8,  9.  6.  The  infer- 
ence to  be  drawn  from  all  this  for  our  benefit ; 
how  that  which  happened  to  them  may  also  happen 
to  us,  (Luke  xxiii.  31 ;  Rom.  xi.  21-23;  Rev.  ii.  5). 

2.  Ver.  12.  A  sermon  of  consolation,  on  the 
occasion  of  a  death,  or  other  great  misfortune. 
Our  text  suggests  remedies  for  great  pain.  These 
are — I.  Of  a  natural  kind.  1.  The  sympathy  of 
all  men:  '  I  say  to  you  all,  etc.,  look  and  see, 
etc'  2.  Comparison  with  the  pain  of  others: 
"see  if  there  be  any  sorrow  like  unto  my  sor- 
row,"— where  we  are  warned  against  the  error 
of  supposing  our  pain  the  greatest  that  ever  was. 


and  are  reminded  that  some  are  more  unfortu- 
nate than  ourselves.  II.  Of  a  spiritual  kind.  1. 
The  Lord  has  inflicted  the  wounds.  2.  The 
Lord  will  heal  them.  [Consider,  here,  espe- 
cially the  active  sympathy  of  Christ.  To  the 
question  'Was  ever  any  sorrow  like  unto  my 
sorrow!'  we  may  answer,  'Yes,  Christ's,  and 
greater,  too?'  If  "His  visage  was  so  marred 
more  than  any  man,  and  His  form  more  than  the 
sons  of  men,"  it  was  because,  rnore  than  any  man, 
He  was  "  stricken,  smitten  of  God,  and  afflicted." 
He  bore  the  whole  burden  of  our  guilt  and  He  suf- 
fered its  full  penalty.  "The  Lord  laid  on  Him 
the  iniquity  of  us  all,"  and  'He  bore  our  griefs 
and  carried  our  sorrows.'  Why?  Not  only  in  the 
way  of  atonement,  but  that  He  might  be  a  merciful 
High  Priest,  to  sympathize  with  us  and  to  help 
us.     See  Heb.  ii.  17,  18  ;  iv.  15,  16.— W.  H.  H.] 

3.  Vers.  12-22.  A  sermon  on  penitence;  when 
a  calamity,  that  may  properly  be  considered  as 
a  Divine  chastisement,  calls  for  repentance. 
Subject:  The  calamily,  ivhick  has  befallen  us,  con- 
sidered in  the  light  of  Divine  righteousness  and  love. 

I.  It  proceeds  from  Divine  righteousness.  1. 
Not  another,  but  the  Lord,  has  ordained  it 
against  us,  vers.  14,  15.  2.  It  corresponds  ex- 
actly to   whut  we  have  deserved,   vers.  14,  18. 

II.  It  proceeds  from  Divine  love.  1.  It  admo- 
nishes us  to  sincere  repentance.  2.  It  dissuades 
us  from  confiding  in  any  false  hope  or  support, 
vers.  13-16,  21.  3.  It  incites  us  to  seek  help  from 
God  in  a  believing  spirit,  ver.  20. 

4.  Ver.  20.  Floret — Biblical  Guide  for  spiri- 
tual funeral  discourses,  Leipzig,  1861,  No.  385: 
"  Well  is  it  for  a  distressed  widow,  in  her  agony, 
to  look  to  the  Lord.  For — 1.  The  Lord  knows 
thy  pain,  which  He  Himself  has  inflicted.  2. 
The  Lord  soothes  tliy  pain,  for  He  is  the  best 
Comforter.  3.  The  Lord  changes  thy  pain,  sooner 
or  later,  into  a  blessed  experience  of  good." 


Chapter  II. 

LAMENTATION    OP    THE    POET    OVER   THE    DESTRUCTION    OF    ZION  :     [tHE    DESTRUCTION   DESCRIBED   AND 
ATTRIBUTED    TO    JEHOVAH. W.    H.    H.J 


city  an 


'TUe^rs<  song  expresses  sorrow  over  the  disg:race  of  tte  city :  tlie  secnnd  describes  the  terrors  of  the  destruc 
,nd  Temple  "  (CtERLAch,  Intr.,  p.  5),  and  connects  them  with  the  vengeance  of  God.     In  the  tirst  song,  the  city 


destruction  of  the 
is  the  con- 


Bpicuous  object  and  Zion  and  the  holy  places  appear  as  accessories  to  her  former  honor  and  her  present  disgrace.     In  the 
second  song,  God's  personal  agency  in"  the  calamities  described  is  the  controlling  idea  (see  vers.  1-9,  17,  20-22),  and  the  Tem- 


ter  is  composed  of  two  sections :  1.  vers.  1-10,  a  description  of  the  jndgment  which  the  Lord  had  inflicted  ;  2.  vers.  12-22, 
lamentations  over  this  judgment.  The  similarity  of  the  general  structure  of  Songs  i.,  ii.,  their  division  into  two  almost  equal 
parts  the  first  chiefly  descriptive,  the  second  more  strictly  composed  of  lamentations,  is  an  evidence  that  they  were  written 
by  one  author,  and  help  to  compose  one  complete  and  symmetrical  poem.— W.  H.  H.] 

PAR'?  L 
Vers.  1-10. 
J<  Ver.  1.   How  doth  the  Lord  cover  with  a  cloud,  in  His  anger, 
The  daui^hter  of  Zion  ! 
He,  i'rora  Heaven,  hath  cast  down  to  the  ground 

The  glory  of  Israel, 
He  remeraliL'red  not  His  footstool. 
In  the  day  of  His  anger. 


*  rin  an  alphabetical  poem,  wh-^re  attention  is  directed  to  the  initial  letters,  it  may  not  be  without  significance  that  in 
S«niR8  1.,  ii.,  the  initials  of  the  first  three  word<  an;  similar,  spelling  J'X.  tliat  may  mean  hated,  despised,  or  an  enemy.  In 
♦   "  initials'of  the  first  four  wordu  of  i.  we  have  n3\S,  enmily.—'W.  11.  ll.l 


CHAP.  II.   1-10.  «!> 


'2  Ver.  2.   The  Lord  swallowed  up  and  spared  not 

All  the  habitations  of  Jacob  : 
He  demolished  in  His  wrath 

The  strongholds  of  the  daughter  of  Judah : 
He  cast  down  to  the  ground — He  polluted 

The  kingdom  and  its  princes. 
Jl  Ver.  3.     He  broke  in  hot  anger 

Every  horn  of  Israel. 
He  turned  back  His  right  hand 

Before  the  rnemy. 
And  He  set  Jacob  on  fire — 

As  a  flame  of  fire  devoureth  round  about. 
"1  Ver.  4.   He  bent  His  bow  as  an  enemy  : 

He  stood — with  His  right  hand  as  an  adversary- 
And  destroyed 

All  the  delights  of  the  eye. 
In  the  tabernacle  of  the  daughter  of  Zion 

He  poured  out,  as  fire,  His  fury. 
n  Vee.  5.    The  Lord  became  as  an  enemy : 

He  swallowed  up  Israel ; 
He  swallowed  up  all  her  palaces ; 

He  destroyed  all  His  strongholds  : 
And  increased  in  the  daughter  of  Judah 

Mourning  and  lamentation. 


*)  Ver.  6.    And  He  laid  waste  as  a  garden  His  tabernacle : 
He  abolished  His  appointed  solemnities : 
Jehovah  caused  to  be  forgotten  in  Zion 

Appointed  solemnities  and  Sabbath  days  : 
And  rejected  in  His  furious  anger 
King  and  Priest. 
t  Ver.  7.    The  Lord  cast  away  with  disdain  His  altar, 
He  abhorred  His  Sanctuary. 
He  gave  up  into  the  enemy's  hand 

The  walls  of  her  palaces. 
They  shouted  in  Jehovah's  house 
As  on  a  day  of  appointed  solemnity. 
n  Ver.  8.  Jehovah  purposed 

To  destroy  the  wall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion. 
He  stretched  out  a  line  : 

He  withdrew  not  His  hand  from  devouring. 
Then  He  caused  rampart  and  wall  to  mourn  j 
They  languished  together. 
to  Ver.  9.   Her  gates  have  sunk  into  the  ground  : 
He  destroyed  and  broke  her  bars. 
Her  King  and  her  Princes  among  the  Gentiles- 
There  is  no  law ! 
Her  Prophets  also 

Find  no  vision  from  Jehovah ! 
♦  Ver.  10.  The  elders  of  the  daughter  of  Zion 

Sit  on  the  ground, — they  are  silent, — 
They  throw  up  dust  upon  their  heads, 

They  put  on  sackcloth. 
The  virgins  of  Jerusalem 

Bow  their  heads  to  the  ground. 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


ANALYSIS. 

In  this  song,  as  in  the  preceding  one,  the  alphabetical  construction  interferes  with  the  succession  of  the  seve- 
ral steps  and  parts  of  the  great  drama  in  their  regular  order  ;  get,  on  close  examination,  some  regard 
to  the  arrangement  of  events,  with  reference  to  their  nature  and  occurrence,  is  observable.  There  is 
given,  first  of  all,  a  comprehensive  surveg  of  the  whole  work  of  destruction,  vers.  1,  2.  Then  follow* 
a  brief  recital  of  the  events  of  the  war,  from  its  beginning  to  the  capture  of  the  city,  vers.  3,  4.  Then 
is  described  the  complete  destruction  of  the  Temple,  the  homes  and  the  walls,  by  Xebuzaradan,  four 
weeks  after  the  capture  of  the  city  (see  Jer.  lii.  18,  14),  vers.  5-9  a.  Thus  far  only  the  material 
objects  of  the  destruction  are  spoken  of.  What  follows  relates  the  .niferings  of  the  per.'^ons  icho  icrre 
involved  in  the  catastrophe.  From  ver.  9  6  we  learn  the  fate  of  the  King,  Princes  and  Prophets;  in 
ver.  10  we  see  the  elders  and  the  virgins  lamenting  ;  in  ver.  1 1  the  Poet  describes  his  oivn  sufferings, 
etc.  [Naegelsbach  does  not  recognize  the  very  obvious  division  of  this  chapter  into  two  parts. 
Gerlach  makes  three  sections,  vers.  1-10,  11-19,  20-22.— The  first  part  naturally  divides  itself  info 
two  equal  sections :  vers.  1-5  contain  a  general  description  of  the  punishment  of  Zion;  vers.  6-10 
relate  particularly  to  the  destruction  of  Zion  itself. — W.  H.  H.  ] 

11.  Vers.  1,  2. 

1  How  hath  the  Lord  covered  the  daughter  of  Zion  with  a  cloud  in  his  anger,  and 
cast  down  from  heaven  unto  the  earth  the  beauty  of  Israel,  and  remembered  not 

2  his  footstool  in  the  day  of  his  anger !  The  Lord  hath  swallowed  up  all  the  habi- 
tations of  Jacob,  and  hath  not  pitied ;  he  hath  thrown  down  in  his  wrath  the 
strongholds  of  the  daughter  of  Judah  :  he  hath  brought  them  down  to  the  ground : 
he  hath  polluted  the  kingdom  and  the  princes  thereof. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver  1.— 3"'y^  From  the  verbal  stem,  35J^,  from  which  is  3J^,  a  cloud,  only  this  single  form  occurs,  and  this  is  an.  Kty. 
[13X3-  Gerlach  :  "  not  ^vith  wrath  (Ewald),  but  in  His  wrath,  as  similar  expressions  at  the  close  of  this  ver.  and  in  vers.  2, 
6,  21,  22,  show.'"— ■'JIK-  See  Intr.  Add.  Rem.  p.  32.]— IJ^bli'n  — Only  H'^ed  in  Hiph.  anil  Hoph.;  frequent  in  Jeremiah,  vii.  15, 
29 ;  ix.  18 ;  xli.  9,  etc. — V"^X-  Accusative  of  place,  in  answer  to  the  question,  Wliither  ?  1  Sam.  xxv.  23 ;  1  Kings  i.  31 ;  Is.  xlix. 
23 ;  Amos  ix.  9 ;  Ob.  3 ;  Ps.  cxlvii.  15  ;  my  Gr.,  §  70,  6.  Jeremiah  uses  y"1X  as  accusative  after  verbs  of  going  and  coming 
very  frequently,  xxxvii.  12 ;  xl.  12 ;  xlii.  1-1 ;  xliii.  7,  e<c.— n"lNDP-  mXpH,  a  corresponding  word,  is  very  frequent  with 
Jeremiah,  xlviii.  17  ;  xiii.  11, 18  ;  xxxiii.  9.— 13T.  in  same  sense,  Jer.  xxxi.  20  ;  xv.  15.  DHO,  not  fouuU  iu  Jer.— Jeremiah 
never  says  f>X  DV.  The  only  place  in  which  he  connects  nx  with  the  idea  of  a  particular  time,  he  says  ?|3X  nj^3,  xviii. 
23.    The  expression  is  found  in  Lam.  only  here  and  vers.  21,  22. 

Ver.  2.— nbs.  Jeremiah  uses  only  Kal,  and  that  only  once,  li.  34.  Piel  in  this  chapter  five  times,  vers.  2, 5,  his,  8, 16,  no- 
where else  in  Lam.— ['JIX-  ^ne,  Jntr.  Add.  Rem.\>.?&.]-hryr\  xS.  [K'ri,  X^V  "  The  asyndeton  is  much  used  in  this  species 
of  verse  at  the  half  pause."  Blatney.]  Jeremiah  uses  the  word  Sofl,  xiii.  li  ;  xv.  5  ;  xxi.  7 ;  1. 14 ;  li.  3.  But  to  express 
the  thought,  which  SdH  x"?  here  represents,  Jeremiah  uses  DPJ  X'Sl,  xx.  16.  [With  all  deference,  the  thought  in  xx. 
16  is  only  analogous  to  the  thought  here,  which  is  exactly  expressed  in  the  passages  first  cited.  This  is  not  to  be  overlooked 
in  considering  the  peculiarities  of  Jeremiah's  style  and  language.— W.H.H.]—:}p;»'_  n'lXJ  occurs  only  here.  [Blavney 
translates  fllXJ  pleasant  places,  following  the  Sept.,  TtavTa  toi  i>pala,  and  the  Latin,  omnia  speciosa.  Douat  :  all  that  was 
beautiful  in  Jacob.  Thougli  HXJ  is  used  in  this  sense  in  the  Piel,  there  is  no  clear  case  where  the  noun  has  this  sense ;  it 
designates  either  dwellings,  Ps.lxxiv.  20  ;  Ixxxiii.  13,  ox  pasture-grounds  regarded  as  the  dwellings  of  shepherds  and  their 
flocks  Am.  i.  2  •  Jer.  ix.  9  •  xxv.  37  ;  Ps.  xxiii.  2  ;  Ixv.  13.  Fuerst  translates'  it  here  unorntected,  open  cities,  opposite  of 
walled  and  fortified  places.— W.  H.  H.]— Din  Jeremiah  uses  frequently,  i.  10  ;  xxiv.  6 ,  xxxi.  28,  ete.— He  uses  Hl^;'  only 
twice,  vii.  29 ;  xlviii.  30.— m^ir'n^  ''"l^^O-  See  Jer.  i.  8  ;  v.  17.— Sbn,  Piel,  occurs  in  Jeremiah,  xvi.  18  ;  xxxi.  5; 
xxxiv.  10  ;  comp.  Is.  xliii.  28.— ■T'ltl^l  T\3^D7!i-  Sept.  has  /3a<nXe'a  avrrj^.  They  must  have  read  n^/D  as  in  ver.  9.  The 
Syriac  and  Arabic  read  so  also.^  Yet^the  authority  of  the  Septuagint  is  much  too  precarious  to  change  the  readin-  of  tlie 
text,  which  is  also  found  in  the  Vnlg.  and  Chal.  Besides,  it  is  much  easier  to  explain  how  n375,  at  the  time  iu  sight  at 
ver.  9,  could  originate  from  DdSsD,  than  it  would  be  to  account  for  the  reverse.    713700  in  connection  with  T\'''^p  (the 

Bufflx  of  which  refers  to  the  former)  and  with  reference  to  HIXJ  and  D"lV3D,  is  withuut  doubt  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of 

T  •  t;    ■ 

royalty=king8hip,  resria /)0<e«<as.    Jeremiah  uses  the  word  iu  this  sense,  xxvii.  1 ;    xxviii.  1.     [Fuerst:  dominion,  reign, 
kingdom.] 

Zion  •with  a  cloud  in  his  anger.  The  Poet 
lius  evidently  the  image  of  a  thutuler-storm  in 
liis  niiiul.  The  wriitli  of  Jehovah  envelops  Zion 
iu  a  cloud,  out  of  which  the  destroying  lightning 
(see  next  clause)  descends  upon  her.     £Wouds- 


EXEGETICAL    AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  1.   How — see  i.  1  — hath  the  Lord  co- 
vered— doth  the  Lord  cover — the  daughter  of 


CHAP.   II.  1,  2. 


71 


WORTH :  "  The  Lord  hath  poured  out  His  fury 
on  Zion,  as  in  a  tempest,  and  has  dashed  down 
her  beauty  as  with  lightning,  and  has  not  spared 
the  Ark  of  His  Sanctuary."  Gerlach:  in  his 
•wrath.  "  The  frequent  repetition  of  this  ex- 
pression (see  at  the  close  of  vers.  3,  6,  21,  22) 
shows  that  this  chapter  is  especially  intended  to 
exhibit  the  fury  of  the  wrath  of  God  against  Je- 
rusalem ;  as  in  the  first  chapter  the  repetition  of 
the  formula,  indicating  the  absence  of  help  and 
comfort,  corresponds  to  the  description  of  the 
extreme  distress  described  in  that  chapter."] 
The  expression  daughter  of  Zion  occurs  i.  G, 
and  Jeremiah  iv.  31  ;  vi.  2,  23. — And  cast 
down  from  heaven  unto  the  earth  the 
beauty  of  Israel.  To  understand  this  it  is 
necessary  to  determine  first  of  all  to  whom  the 
words  from  heaven  refer.  At  the  first  glance 
they  seem  to  refer  to  the  object  of  the  verb  cast 
down.  In  that  case  the  beauty  of  Israel 
would  be  in  Heaven  and  from  Heaven  hurled 
down  to  the  earth.  But  in  what  sense  was  the 
beauty  of  Israel  in  Heaven  ?  To  answer  this, 
we  must  first  know  what  is  meant  by  the 
beauty  or  glory  of  Israel.  The  word  in  the 
original  r\T5<3n,  by  itself,  could  indicate  the 
Temple  which  the  Israelites  called  'Jn^^pp  r\^2 
[lit.,  house  of  our  glory ;  E.  V.,  our  beautiful  house'], 
Is.  liv.  10;  comp.  Ix.  7;  Ixiii.  15;  or,  the  ark 
of  the  covenant,  in  reference  to  which  the  daugh- 
ter-in-law of  Eli  gave  to  her  child  the  name  of 
Ichabod,  which  is  thus  interpreted  (1  Sam.  iv. 
21,  22),  "And  she  named  the  child  Ichabod, 
[Marg.:  where  is  the  glory?  or,  there  is  no 
glory],  saying.  The  glory  is  departed  from 
Israel  (because  the  ark  of  God  was  taken,  and  be- 
cause of  her  father-in-law  and  her  husband) :  and 
she  said.  The  glory  is  departed  from  Israel ; 
for  the  ark  of  God  is  taken."  See  Ps.  Ixxviii.  61. 
The  word  P^NiJil  is,  however,  in  itself  too  ab- 
stract and  general,  and  there  is  too  little  in  the 
context  to  fix  its  definition,  to  allow  us  to  say 
with  confidence  that  it  denotes  in  the  concrete 
any  particular  object.  We  are  obliged,  there- 
fore, to  acquiesce  in  its  general  sense,  and  to 
understand  by  it  the  glory  of  Israel  in  general, 
especially  all  that  distinguishes  Israel  as  the 
chosen  people  before  all  peoples.  All  this  is 
truly,  by  the  destruction  of  the  Theocracy,  cast 
down  to  the  ground.  Should  we  now  refer  from 
Heaven  to  the  object  of  the  verb  cast  dow^n, 
then  we  must  take  it  figuratively,  as  expressing 
the  height  of  the  glory  or  beauty  of  Israel, 
which  is  thus  denoted  as  towering  up  to  Heaven, 
But  Heaven  D'Ol^  is  never  used  in  this  figurative 
sense  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  places  which 
are  cited  as  proving  such  a  use  of  the  word  (Gen. 
xi.  4;  Job  XX.  6;  Isa.  xiv.  12;  Dan.  iv.  8 ;  2 
Chron.  xxviii.  9;  comp.  Gen.  iv.  10)  are  entirely 
irrelevant.  In  the  New  Testament  only  Matt, 
xi.  23;  Luke  x.  15  ("and  thou,  Capernaum, 
which  art  exalted  unto  Heaven,"  etc.)  afford 
possible  analogies  for  such  a  figurative  use  of 
this  phrase.  Therefore  I  believe  (with  Datue, 
Kalkar  and  others)  that  from  Heaven  is  to  he 
referred  to  the  subject  of  the  verb  cast  down: 
the  Lord  from  Heaven  casts  down  the  glory  of  l.s- 
rael  to  the  ground.  This  also  suits  admirably 
the  idea  expressed  in  the  verb  in  the  first  clause, 


S'J^'^to  cover  with  a  cloud,  under  which  the  image 
of  a  thunder-storm  is  suggested.  From  the 
Heavens  tbe  Lord,  by  a  stroke  of  lightning,  casts 
down  the  glory  of  Israel.  From  Heaven,  D'Dli/p. 
is  often  used  in  this  sense.  Josh.  x.  11 ;  2  Sam. 
xsii.  14;  Gen.  xix.  24  ;  Ex.  xvi.  4,  etc. — And 
remembered  not  His  footstool  in  the  day 
of  His  anger.  The  ark  of  the  covenant  is  ex- 
plicitly called  the  footstool  of  Jehovah  in  1  Chron. 
xxviii.  2,  where  David  says,  "  I  had  in  mine 
heart  to  build  an  house  of  rest  for  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  of  the  Lord  and  for  the  footstool  of  our 
God"  ^and  for  the  footstool.  "The  conjunction 
and  is  exegetical,  and  the  same  with  that  is."  So 
says  Joseph  Mede  in  his  article  on  Ps.  cxxxii. 
7,  "  We  will  go  into  His  tabernacle,  we  will  wor- 
ship at  [toivards,  MedeI  His  footstool." — W.  H. 
H.].  The  ark  of  the  covenant  may  be  so  called, 
because  He,  who  is  enthroned  upon  the  cherubim 
(2  Sam.  vi.  2;  Ps.  Ixxx.  2;  xcix.  1)  [see  also  1 
Sam.  iv.  4,  which  Mkde  translates  sittelh  upon 
the  cherubims. — W.  H.  H.],  has  the  cover  of  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  [the  mercy-seat]  at  His  feet, 
wherefore  it  is    also  said,  that  the  Lord  speaks 

^n^r"?  '^"9.  /'"on«  above  the  mercy-seat,  Ex.  xxv. 
22;  Num.  vii.  89.  Therefore,  without  doubt, 
the  ark  of  the  covenant  is  to  be  understood  as  the 
footstool,  towards  which  worship  is  said  to  be 
directed  in  Ps.  xcix.  5;  cxxxii.  7.  [Alexander: 
on  Ps.  xcix.  5.  "  Exalt  ye  Jehovah  our  God,  and 
prostrate  yourselves  to  His  footstool. — Bow  down 
(or  prostrate)  yourselves,  as  an  act  of  worship. 
Not  at  His  footstool,  as  the  mere  place  of  worship, 
but  to  it,  as  the  object,  this  name  being  constantly 
given  to  the  ark,  1  Chron.  xxviii.  2;  Lam.  ii.  1; 
Ps.  cxxxii.  7;  Isa.  Ix.  13.  Even  in  Isa.  Ixvi.  1, 
there  is  allusion  to  the  ordinary  usage  of  the 
terms.  The  ark  is  here  represented  as  the  ob- 
ject of  worship,  just  as  Zion  is  in  Isa.  xlv.  14, 
both  being  put  for  the  God  who  was  present  in 
them."  Calvin:  "The  design  of  the  Prophet 
is  to  show  to  the  people  how  much  God's  wrath 
had  been  kindled,  when  He  spared  not  even  His 
own  sanctuary.  For  he  takes  this  principle  as 
granted,  that  God  is  never  without  reason  angry, 
and  never  exceeds  the  due  measure  of  punish- 
ment. As,  then,  God's  wrath  was  so  great  that 
He  destroyed  His  own  Temple,  it  was  a  token  of 
dreadful  wi-ath.  *  *  He  (the  prophet)  could  not 
have  better  expressed  to  the  people  the  heinous- 
ness  of  their  sins,  than  by  laying  before  them 
this  fact,  that  God  remembered  7iot  His  footstool  in 
the  day  of  His  anger."] — The  three  members  of 
the  verse  are  so  related  to  each  other,  that  the 
first  exhibits  Zion  as  completely  enveloped  as  it 
were  in  a  thunder  cloud,  the  second  represents 
the  glory  of  Israel  as  destroyed  by  the  lightning, 
the  third  dwells  especially  on  the  fact,  that  the 
Lord  had  not  so  much  as  spared  the  holiest  of 
holy  things,  the  ark  of  the  covenant. 

[3''J?\  Naegelsbach  translates  it  verdunkelt; 
Gerlach,  umivolkt;  Hugh  Broughton,  JecZowrfer/. 
— Owen,  in  a  note  to  his  translation  of  Calvin, 
observes  that  this  verb  is  clearly  in  the  future 
tense,  and  proposes  to  translate  it,  "Why  should 
the  Lord  in  His  wrath  becloud  the  daughter  of 
Zion?"  "Then  follows,"  he  says,  "a  descrip- 
tion of  what  had  happened  to  Zion,  He  hath  cast 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


from  Heaven,"  etc.  Scott  seems  to  take  the 
same  view  of  the  exposlulatory  character  of  the 
sentence,  when  he  says,  the  prophet  "inquires, 
with  mingled  surprise  and  regret,  how  the  Lord, 
the  Author  of  her  afflictions,  could  be  induced 
thus  to  distress  her  ?"  But  it  is  better  to  take 
the  verb  in  the  sense  of  the  present.  How  doth 
the  Lord  cover,  etc.,  as  Bl.vyney,  Boothroyd, 
Naegelsbach  and  Gerlach.  The  Poet  "as- 
sumes an  ideal  point  of  vision  prior  to"  the  ac- 
tual occurrence  of  the  event,  "  and  so  regards  it 
as  future."  Yet  while  he  speaks,  the  thing  is 
done:  and  the  description  is  completed  in  the 
past  tense.  The  future  as  thus  used  in  Hebrew, 
is  best  translated  by  the  present  in  English.  See 
Green's  Gr.,  §  263,  5.  "The  intermingling  of 
different  tenses  in  relation  to  the  same  subject, 
which  is  so  frequent  in  poetry,  foreign  as  it  may 
be  to  our  modes  of  thought,  does  not  justify  the 
conclusion  that  they  are  used  promiscuously  or 
without  regard  to  their  distinctive  signiticalion  " 
{lb.  note  "a.").  If  we  accept  Naegelsbach's 
idea  of  the  thunder-cloud  and  the  lightning,  the 
use  of  the  future  in  the  first  verb  is  very  forci- 
ble. The  Poet  sees  the  cloud  gathering,  and 
while  he  looks,  the  lightning  has  flashed  and  the 
work  of  destruction  is  complete. — Aben-Ezra, 
according  to  Rosenmueller,  see  also  Calvin, 
explains  the  word  to  mean  lifted  up  to  the  clouds. 
God  exalted  the  daughter  of  Zion  to  the  clouds, 
''in  His  wrath,'' i\in.t  He  might  cast  her  down 
from  a  greater  height.  "  For  when  one  wishes 
to  break  in  pieces  an  earthen  vessel,  he  not  only 
casts  it  on  the  ground,  but  he  raises  it  up,  that 
it  may  be  thrown  down  with  greater  force " 
(Calvin).  We  need  some  evidence  better  than 
this  ingenious  argument  that  the  word  can  have 
this  meaning.— The  Chald.  and  Syr.,  Gesenius 
in  his  Thes.,  Maurer  and  J.  D.  Michaelis  trans- 
late the  word  sprevit,  contumelia  vel  opprohrio  af- 
fecit,  dishonored,  disgraced,  finding  for  this  sense  an 
analogy  in  the  Arabic.  The  principal  argument 
for  this  is,  that  he  who  is  thrown  down  from 
Heaven  is  not  surrounded  with  clouds.  We  an- 
swer 1.  According  to  Naegelsbach  above,  "from 
Heaven"  refers  to  the  subject  and  not  to  the  ob- 
ject of  the  verb  "  cast  down."  2.  The  figure 
of  the  thunder-cloud  implies  rather  that  the 
cloud  covered  the  doomed  City  and  Temple,  and 
not  that  they  weie  lifted  up  into  the  clouds.  3. 
There  are  two  subjects  expressed,  as  well  as  two 
verbs.  Not  the  daughter  of  Zion,  but  the  glory  of 
Israel  is  cast  down  to  the  ground. — Gerlach 
gives  a  poetical  explanation  to  the  first  two 
clauses,  "  Jerusalem  is  compared  to  a  star,  that 
once  shone  brightly,  but  was  first  clouded  over 
and  then  thrown  to  the  earth:"  and  seems  to 
imagine  an  allusion  to  Isa.  xiv.  12.  But  his 
beautiful  star  shines  only  in  his  fancy,  and  not 
in  the  text. 

Ver.  2.  The  Lord  hath  swallowed  up. — 
The  Poet  has  in  mind  the  idea  of  a  yawning 
abyss.  See  Ex.  xv.  12;  Num.  xvi.  30-32;  xxvi. 
10;  Deut.  xi.  6;  Ps.  cvi.  17.  [All  the  English 
versions  translate  the  verb  .fwallvioed  up,  except 
Henderson  {destroyed)  and  the  Uouay  {The  Lord 
hath  cast  down  headlong,  from  \\x\gdi,i&,pTecipitavit). 


Yet  it  seems  manifest,  from  the  use  of  the  same 
word  in  vers.  5,  8,  16  (see  also  Hab.  i.  13  ;  Isa. 
XXV.  7,  8;  xlix.  19;  2  Sam.  xx.  19),  that  the 
word  is  used  merely  to  signify  utter  destruction, 
without  intending  to  suggest,  even  in  a  figurative 
sense,  the  exact  method  of  destruction,  as  by  such 
"a  yawning  abyss"  as  is  referred  to  in  passages 
cited  by  Naegelsbach.  Gerlach  has  destroyed, 
vertilgt,  Calvin  also,  perdidit. — W.  H.  H.] — All 
the  habitations  of  Jacob.  The  word  ren- 
dered habitations  includes  the  ide;is  of  dwellings 
and  pasture-grounds.  It  indicates  the  places 
where  the  Nomadic  spread  his  tent  and  allowed 
his  flock  to  graze.  Hence  the  frequent  phrase 
■^SIO  niX3  [lit.  dwellings  of  pasture-land^,  Ps. 
IxV.  13;  Jer.  ix.  9;  xxiii.  10;  Joel  i.  19,  20:  ii. 
22.  And  hath  not  pitied.  See  vers.  17.  21 ; 
iii.  43.  And  spared  not.  [So  the  Sept.  and  Vulg. 
E.  V.  pitied,  is  most  in  accordance  with  the  use 
of  the  worfl:  yet  the  idea  of  sparing,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  mercy,  is  suggested  by  the  order  of  the 
words  in  the  original.  The  Lord  swallowed  up 
and  spared  not  all  the  habitations  of  Jacob.  So 
Calvin,  Brougiiton,  Gerlach. — W.  H.  H.]  — 
He  hath  thrown  dow^n — demolished,  in  His 
wrath  the  strongholds  of  the  daughter  of 
Judah.  The  strongholds  of  Judah  stand  in  anti- 
thesis to  the  habitations  of  Jacob;  not  only  the 
open  unprotected  places,  where  the  people  dwelt 
among  their  pasture  and  grazing  lands,  but  also 
the  fortified  cities  were  visited  with  destruction. 
— The  daughter  of  Judah,  see  i.  15;  ii.  5. 
The  expression  is  very  suitable,  since  only  Judah 
still  had  any  strongholds.  See  Jer.  xxxiv.  7. — 
He  hath  brought  them  down  to  the  ground: 
He  hath  polluted  the  kingdom  and  the 
princes  thereof.  He  cast  down  to  the  ground. 
He  polluted  the  kingdom  and  its  princes.  The  ex- 
pression y^.X^  .?^-''7'  ^^  bring  down  to  the  ground, 
is  used  very  explicitly  of  fortified  places  in  Isa. 
XXV.  12;  xxvi.  5,  comp.  Ezek.  xiii.  14.  Yet  to  refer 
it  here  to  what  precedes,  results  in  a  troublesome 
asyndeton.  Then,  too,  the  structure  of  the  verse 
would  be  irregular,  for  the  second  idea  and 
clause  of  the  verse  would  have  three  lines  or 
members,  and  the  third  only  one.  Finally,  there 
is  an  idea  in  bringing  down  to  the  ground  [or  made 
to  touch  the  ground;  margin,  E.  V.J,  akin  to  that 
of  pollution,  which  immediately  follows.  For 
majesty  is  polluted  by  being  brought  into  con- 
tact with  common  dust.  Compare  Ps.  Ixxxix.  40, 

''■'^  X"^)^  ^'T^H.  "Thou  hast  profaned  his 
crown,  by  casting  it  to  the  ground."  [In  favor 
of  Naegelsbacii's  construction  is  1.  the  absence 
of  the  conjunction.     2.   The  prevailing  meaning 

of  the  verb  ^JJ  followed  by  7,  to  touch,  to  come 
in  contact  with.  3.  The  natural  division  of  the 
verse.  4.  Tlie  excellent  sense.  This  construc- 
tion is  adopted  by  Rosenmueller,  Ewald,  Neu- 
mann, Blayney  and  Noyes.  The  only  objections 
to  it  are  1,  the  application  of  the  phrase  brought 
down  to  the  ground,  in  Isaiah,  to  the  razing  of 
fortified  places;  and  2,  which  is  a  stronger  ob- 
jection, the  Masoretic  punctuation. — W.  H.  H.] 


CHAP.  II.  3,  4. 


II.  3,  4. 


He  hath  cut  off  ia  hia  fierce  anger  all  the  horn  of  Israel :  he  hath  drawn  back 
his  right  hand  from  before  the  enemy,  and  he  burned  against  Jacob  like  a  flaming 
fire,  ivhich  devoureth  round  about.  He  hath  bent  his  bow  like  au  enemy  :  he  stood 
with  his  right  hand  as  an  adversary,  and  slew  all  that  were  pleasant  to  the  eye  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  daughter  of  Zion  :  he  poured  out  his  fury  like  fire. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAI.. 

Ver.  3. — V']^.    Only  the  Niph.  is  found  in  Jer.,  xlviii.  25 ;  1.  23. — fjX-^in,  not  in  Jeremiah. — n3n7>  Jer.  xlviii.  45. — 

3'3D  ri/DN,  see  Jer.  xxi.  14;  xlvi.  14;  1.  32.    Jeremiah  always  employs  as  the  object  of  73X  in  this  sense,  D''3''^D  or 
.  •  T        T  :  |t  -  t  •     •  : 

Ver.  4. — ntyp  ^^'l,  Jer.  ix.  2  ;  xlvi.  9  ;  1.  14,  29  ;  li.  3. — There  is  no  sufficient  reason  for  questioning  the  pointing  of 
32f  J  IS  Part.  Niph.  It  is  in  apposition  with  li')^,  [32f  J  is  used  of  God's  coming  in  judgment  in  Isa.  iii.  13;  Ps.  Ixxxii.  1. 
Its  close  conuection  by  1  with  the  next  verb  slioulJ  not  be  unobserved.  He  stood  or  set  Himself — His  right  hand  as  an  ad- 
versary— and  slew,  etc. — W.  H.  H.]     Jeremiah  never  uses  the  Niph.  32fJ,  only  the  Hiph.,  v.  26;  xxxi.  21,  and  Hithp.,  xlvi. 

T  • 
4,  14. — The  verb  y^T\  (see  Lam.  ii.  20,  21 ;  iii.  43),  is  scarcely  current  with  Jeremiah.    He  uses  only  the  Part.  (xxxi.  21)  and 

Inf.  Kal.  (xv.  3).    [Lowth,  Prelim.  Dissert,  on  Isaiah,  and  Blatnet  supply  after  this  verb  "IJ^J-^D,  every  youth,  from  the 

Chaldee  Paraphrase,  to  supply  an  apparent  defect  in  metre. — W.  H.  H.] — The  expression  "-y  r\2    /TMi  occurs  only  here. — 

[The  recurrence  in  Jeremiah  of  the  figures  of  bending  the  how  and  of  pouring  out  fury  as  liquid  fire  (see  Jer.  iv.  4  ;  vii.  20 ; 
xxi.  12  ;  xlii.  18 ;  xliv.  6)  may  be  regarded  as  evidences  of  authorship. — W.  H.  H.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND  CRITICAL. 

Vers.  3,  4.  When  it  is  here  said  that  the  Lord 
had  broken  the  horn  of  Israel,  then  that  He  had 
deprived  him  of  his  right  hand,  then  that  He  had 
kindled  a  fire  in  Jacob,  and  as  an  enemy  had  as- 
saulted him,  it  is  evident  that  a  climax  is  in- 
tended. There  is  described  first  the  deprivation 
of  the  power  of  resistance,  then  the  deprivation 
of  help,  then  the  progress  to  positive  hostility. 
Thenius  sees  in  vers.  8,  4  a  full  statement  of  all 
the  incidents  of  the  war,  from  the  capture  of  the 
frontier  fortresses  to  the  taking  of  the  city  by 
storm.  He  understands,  therefore,  by  the  horn 
of  Israel,  "those  places  of  defence  which  were 
prominent,  like  horns,  consequently  frontier 
fortresses;"  hath  drawn  back  his  right  hand,  etc. 
describes  the  retreat  of  the  Jewish  armies  to  the 
capital;  he  burned  against  Jacob,  etc.,  the  effusion 
of  the  hostile  troops  over  the  land  of  which  they 
were  to  become  masters;  he  hath  bent  his  bow,  etc., 
the  institution  of  siege;  he  stood  with  his  right 
hand,  etc.,  and  slew,  etc.,  the  assault  and  storming 
of  the  city;  he  poured  out  his  fury  like  fire,  the 
capture  of  the  city.  Some  of  this  hits  the  true 
sense,  but  not  all.  That  horn  should  indicate  the 
frontier  fortresses,  is  artificial  li  is  to  be  con- 
sidered, too,  that  the  phrase  is  y^p  Sb,  all  the 
horn  [it  may  mean,  however,  every  horn:  the  ab- 
sence of  the  article  makes  this  sense  most  pro- 
bable.^W.  H.  H,]  To  draw  back  the  bow  would 
not  indicate  the  first  attack  of  the  city,  for  that 
attack  was  not  made  with  arrows  only.  To  stand 
with  the  right  hand  as  an  adversary  does  not  mean 
to  begin  to  fight  with  the  right  hand,  and  does 
not  therefore  describe  an  exclusively  hand  to 
hand  fight.  Certainly,  as  already  remarked,  the 
description  advances  from  merely  negative  to  di- 
rectly positive  hostility,  but  the  latter  is  de- 
scribed, not  by  the  successive  steps  of  the  siege, 


but  according  to  the  various  and — as  far  as 
practicable — simultaneous  events  of  the  achieve- 
ment, wherein  the  most  impressive  event,  repre- 
senting, of  course,  the  end,  is  placed  last  of  all. 
Ver.  3.  He  hath  cut  off — He  broke — in  his 
fierce  anger — in  hot  anger.  See  Ex.  xi.  8; 
Deut.  xxix.  23;  Is.  vii.  4;  1  Sam.  xx.  34;  2 
Chron.  xxv.  10.  [The  pronoun  his  supplied  in 
E.  V.  is  unnecessary,  and  weakens  the  sense. 
There  is  a  rhetorical  climax  in  the  words — 
anger,  ^X,  ver.  1;  wrath,  H^^^,  ver.  2;  and  heat 
of  anger,  or  hot,  fierce,  furious  anger,  ^N"'"!!!. 
ver.  3.— W.  H.  H.]— AU  the  horn  of  Israel— 
Every  horn  of  Israel.  See  Jer.  xlviii.  25;  Ps. 
Ixxv.  11.  According  to  constant  usage,  the  horn 
is  a  symbol  of  power  ;  see  Ps.  xviii.  3  ;  Ixxv.  5, 
6,  etc.  [Calvin:  "We  know  that  by  horn  is 
meant  strength  as  well  as  excellency  or  dignity; 
and  I  am  disposed  to  include  both  here,  though 
the  word  breaking  seems  rather  to  refer  to 
strength  or  power."  ]!ioYEs:'' every  horn,  i.  e., 
all  her  means  of  defence."] — He  hath  drawn 
back — He  bent  back — his  right  hand  from  be- 
fore the  enemy.  Dues  the  pronominal  suffix 
his,  in  JJ'P',  his  hand,  refer  to  Jehovah,  or  to 
Israel  ?  Grammatically  either  is  possible,  and 
the  sense  in  either  case  is  substaniially  (he  same. 
The  answer  must  depend  on  which  interpretation 
best  agrees  with  the  usage  of  speech.  The  ex- 
pression in  full,  as  it  is  here,  is  found  nowhere 
else  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  worthy  of  re- 
mark that  Jeremiah  never  uses  yo^^right  hand, 
in  a  figurative  sense.  The  word  occurs  tst.  his 
book  only  once,  xxii.  24,  and  then  in  its  literal 
sense.  The  only  places  that  can  be  adduced  as 
parallel  to  this  place  are,  on  the  one  side,  Ps. 
Ixxiv  11  (with  reference,  perhaps,  to  the  ex- 
pression ^nr  n'!|£OJ — a  stretched-out  arm,  Ex.  vi. 
6,  and  elsewhere),  and  on  the  other  side,  Ps. 
xliv.    11;    Ixxxix.   43,   44;    comp.   Is.    xli.   13 


74 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Whilst  the  first  named  passage  distinctly  ex- 
presses the  thought  that  Jehovah  draws  back 
His  hand,  and  that  His  right  hand,  the  other 
passages  declare  that  the  Lord  let  the  people  or 
the  edge  of  the  sword  fall  back  from  before  their 
enemy.     It  seems  to  me  that  in  our  passage  the 

word  linX,  back,  backward,  standing  in  connection 

.    t'  '  '  °    _ 

with  3'1X  'JSp,  before  the  enemy,  decides  for  the 
latter  meaning.  For  in  Ps.  Ixxiv.  11  it  is  merely 
^1'  2''\pr\,  thou  zviihdrawest  thy  hand.  Here  the 
■^inX,  backward,  must  change  the  sense.  Draw- 
ing back  the  hand  is  merely  the  opposite  of 
stretching  it  out  (n'^tOJ  ^T^I)  and  an  act  of  voli- 
tion consistent  with  the  possession  of  strength. 
But  falling  back  before  the  enemy  is  a  symptom 
of  weakness,  which  could  not  be  asserted  of  the 
hand  of  Jehovah.  As  it  is  said  elsewhere  that 
Jehovah  strengthens  the  right  hand  (Is.  xli.  13), 
or  elevates  it  (Ps.  Ixxxix.  43),  so  it  can  be  said 
that  He  lets  it  fall  back  (as  if  it  had  become 
weak),  and  this  falling  back  of  the  right  hand  is 
the  same,  as  is  elsewhere  explained,  as  a  falling 
back  of  the  person  generally  (Ps.  xliv.  11),  or 
of  the  sword  (held  by  the  right  hand,  Ps.  Ixxxix. 
44).  [Owen  (in  a  note  on  Calvin)  :  "  Gataker, 
Henry,  Blayney,  and  Henderson,  consider  the 
right  hand  as  that  of  Israel — that  God  drew  back 
or  restrained  the  right  hand  of  Israel,  so  that 
he  had  no  power  to  face  his  enemies.  But  Scott 
agrees  with  Calvin  ;  and  favorable  to  the  same 
view  are  the  early  versions,  except  the  Syr.,  for 
they  render  the  pronoun  his  own,  suam ;  the 
Targ.  also  takes  the  same  view.  Had  the  word 
been  hand,  it  might  have  been  applied  to  Israel; 
but  it  is  the  right  hand,  which  commonly  means 
protection,  or  rather  God's  power,  as  put  forth 
to  defend  His  people  and  to  resist  enemies.  This 
is  farther  confirmed  by  what  is  said  in  the  fol- 
lowing verse,  that  God  stood  with  His  right  hand 
as  an  enemy.  See  Ps.  Ixxiv.  11."  Gataker's 
argument,  in  Assembly's  Annotations,  on  the  other 
side,  is  very  strongly  put,  and  agrees  in  its  main 
points  with  Naegelsbach's.  Yet,  for  the  follow- 
ing reasons,  it  seems  necessary  to  stand  by  the 
versions  and  interpreters  that  refer  the  pronoun 
to  God.  1.  The  pronoun  usually  belongs  to  the 
subject  of  the  verb  where  its  personal  object  is 
not  specified.  By  adhering  to  this  rule,  we 
would  often  escape  uncertainty  and  confusion. 
2.  After  such  an  introduction  as  in  ver.  1,  Hotv 
hath  the  Lord  done  all  this,  and  the  subsequent 
use  of  His  with  reference  to  God  (ver.  1,  His  an- 
ger, twice.  His  footstool ;  ver.  2,  His  wrath  ;  ver. 
4,  His  bow.  His  right  hand,  His  fury,  etc.),  it 
certainly  seems  arbitrary  and  violent  in  this  in- 
etance  to  refer  it  to  another  subject.  3.  It  is 
awkward,  to  say  the  least,  to  make  his  right  hand 
in  ver.  3  mean  one  thing,  and  in  ver.  4  another. 
4,  Throughout  this  whole  passage,  vers.  1-10, 
the  pcoplu  of  Israel  are  reprosenicd  as  passive 
objects  of  Divine  wrath,  and  no  allusion  is  made 
to  the  slightest  activity  on  their  part  in  resisting 
the  instruments  of  wrath,  as  would  be  done  here 
if  his  refers  to  Israel.  5.  This  makes  excellent 
sense,  and  preserves  the  continuity  of  the 
thought,  verging  as  usual  towards  a  climax. 
God  breaks  off  the  horn  of  Israel,  that  they  can 
no  longer  oppose  their  enemies  ;   He  bends  back 


His  own  right  hand,  and  thus  withdraws  His  own 
opposition  to  those  enemies;  and  while  Israel 
lies  thus  helpless  in  themselves  and  deprived  of 
God's  help.  He  pours  down  upon  them  the  fiei'V 
fury  of  His  own  wrath,  and  becomes  Hiuiseii 
like  an  enemy  fighting  against  them.  The  bcmi- 
ing  back  of  His  hand  may  be  intended  to  express 
God's  resistance  to  His  own  merciful  impulses 
towards  His  own  people.  He  forcibly  bends 
back  the  hand  He  had  already  stretched  out  in 
Israel's  behalf.— W.  H.  H.]— And  he  burned 
against  Jacob  like  a  flaming  fire,  vchich 
devoureth  round  about — And  He  set  Jacob  on 
fire,  as  a  flame  of  fire  ivhich  devours  round  about 
[«'.  c.  He,  as  a  flame  of  fire  which  consumes  all 
around  it,  set  Jacob  on  fire].  "^^2  with  3  of  the 
object  is  so  often  used  in  the  signification  of  set- 
ting on  fire,  then  of  consuming  by  fire  (Num.  xi. 
1,  3;  Is.  XXX.  33;  xlii.  25;  xliii.  2;  Jer.  xliv. 
6;  Job  i.  16;  Ps.  cvi.  18),  that  we  may  take  it 
here  unhesitatingly  in  the  same  sense.  This,  in- 
deed, is  the  only  admissible  sense.     For  should 

we  take  in  Jacob,  3pJ7''3,  in  a  local  sense,  we 
must  still  understand  "^^y,  of  the  kindling  of 
the  fire,  in  which  sense  only  is  the  Piel  used 
(comp.  Ex.  XXXV.  3;  Jer.  vii.  18;  Ezek.  xxi.  4). 
Then,  too,  we  see  the  force  of  the  particle  of 
comparison,  tJ'XZ),  like  a  flame.  Evidently  the 
meaning  is  that  the  Lord  had  become  to  Jacob  as 
a  flaming  fire.  He  had  become  so  by  kindling 
the  consuming  fire  of  war  in  the  land.  See  Deut. 
xxxii.  22. 

Ver.  4.  He  hath  bent  His  bow  like  an 
enemy.  The  Lord  attacks  Israel  with  all  kinds 
of  weapons:  and  so  with  the  bow.  Comp.  Ps. 
vii.  13  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  23.  [Calvin:  "Stating  a 
part  for  the  whole,  he  includes  in  the  bow  every 
other  weapon."'  Kitto  :  "The  Hebraism  for 
boio  is  like  that  for  bread.  As  the  latter  includes 
all  food,  so  does  the  former  include  all  weapons." 
{Daily  Bib.  111.,  Vol.  3,  p.  295.)— He  stood 
•with  His  right  hand  as  an  adversary.  He 
stood  at  his  right  hand  as  an  adversary.  We  can- 
not take  his  right  hand  as  the  subject  of  the 
verb  (3-^J) — -erecta  est  manus  ejus  instar  hostis 
(Kalkar)  \_His  right  hand  stood  erect  like  an  ad- 
versary, Blayney] — for  neither  does  the  verb 
mean  to  be  erected,  raised  up,  nor  does  its  gen- 
der allow  this  construction.  I  think  it  also  in- 
correct to  take  his  right  hand  as  the  accusative  of 
the  instrument,  as  Thenius,  Vaihinger  and 
others  do.  For  to  stand  with  the  right  hand  as  an 
adversary  is  an  unusually  odd  expression,  with 
no  example  to  sustain  it.  Ewald  would  give  to 
the  verb  2^}  the  meaning  of  taking  aim  at  some- 
thing. [So  Henderson:  He  hath  steadied  His 
right  hand  like  an  adversary.  "The  point  of  the 
comparison  here  is  obviously  that  of  the  care 
taken  by  the  archer  to  obtain  a  steady  aim."] 
Ewald  appeals  to  Ps.  xi.  8,  but  the  phraseology 
in  that  place  is  entirely  different.  I  think  that 
passages  like  Ps.  cix.  G  ;  Zech.  iii.  1  illustrate 
this.  In  those  places  the  enemy  is  represented 
as  standing  at  the  right  hand.  As  it  is  said  else- 
where that  the  friend  and  helper  stands  at  the 
right  hand,  in  order  to  support  and  strengthen 
the  right  hand  (Ps.  xvi.  8;  Ixxiii.  23;  cix.  31; 
ex.  5  ;  cxxi.  5  ;  Is.  xli.  13),  so  it  is  also  said  that 


CHAP.  II.  5. 


the  enemy  places  himself  at  the  right  hand,  in 
order,  by  hemming  it  in  and  weakening  it,  to 
overcome  its  resistance.  That  U'O],  his  right  hand, 
has  to  be  taljen  as  an  accusative  of  place,  is  no 
objection  (see  my  Gr.,  ^70,  c;  Ex.  xxxiii.  8), 
though  elsewhere  a  preposition  is  used  (see  the 
places  above  referred  to,  Ps.  cix.  6  ;  Zech.  iii.  1 
and  Ps.  xlv.  10).  [The  ingenious  reference  of 
his  right  hand  to  Israel  is  peculiar  to  our  author: 
though  ChaldvEus,  as  quoted  by  Rosenmueller, 
adopts  a  similar  construction,  but  with  reference 
to  the  enemies  of  Israel: — "He  has  placed  Him- 
self at  the  right  hand  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  or- 
der to  assist  him."  Besides  the  absence  of  the 
preposition  which  this  interpretation  would  seem 
to  require,  a  very  strong  objection  to  it  is  the 
sudden  change  of  person.  For  the  principal 
reasons  for  supposing  the  right  hand  in  ver.  3  re- 
fers to  God,  because  God  is  the  subject  of  the 
preceding  clause,  and  no  other  person  is  speci- 
fied, we  believe  the  right  hind  in  ver.  4  also  re- 
fers to  God  ;  if  his  bow  means  God's  bow,  and  not 
Israel's,  then  his  right  hand  would  naturally  mean 
God's,  and  not  Israel's,  or  Nebuchadnezzar's,  or 
any  other  person's.  It  is  not  necessary,  how- 
ever, to  violate  grammar  by  giving  to  the  Niphal 
participle  an  active  or  perfect  sense,  as  Ewald 
and  others  have  done.  We  can  translate  literally 
thus :  He  stood,  or  was  standing,  or  set  Himself — 
His  right  hand  as  an  adversary.  The  ellipsis  is 
characteristic  of  Hebrew  poetry,  and  may  be 
supplied  by  quoad,  as  to,  or  exegetically  with,  as 
in  our  version :  He  stood  with  His  right  hand  as 


an  adversary.  Wordsworth:  "The  Prophet 
first  has  a  general  view  of  the  awful  form  of  the 
Almighty,  and  then  beholds  His  Right  Hand  put- 
ting itself  forth  as  an  enemy  against  Sion."  Ro- 
SENMUELLER  :  "  He  lias  placed  Himself  as  regards 
His  right  hand,  as  if  with  it  He  would  hurl  at  me 
a  juveln."  See  Gerlach  also. — W.  H.  H  ]  — 
And  slew  all  that  were  pleasant  to  the 
eye — And  destroyed  all  that  charms  or  delights  the 
eye.  The  delights  of  the  eye  (see  i.  7,  10,  1  i ) 
are  evidently  those  in  whom  the  eyes  of  parents 
t;ike  the  greatest  deli.K'it,  tho  virgins  and  tlie 
young  vien,  i.  18.  [Calvin  :  He  slew  all  the  chosen 
men.  It  is  better  to  take  the  verb  I'^Ti,  to  hdl, 
slay,  metaphorically,  as  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  47,  lor 
destroy  (Hendersun). — W.  H.  H.] — In  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  daughter  of  Zion.  If  the 
daughter  of  Zion  is  the  body  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Zion,  then  the  tabernacle  of  the  daughter  of 
Zion  is  the  dwelling-place  of  those  inhabitants, 
i.  e.,  the  city.  [These  words  are  connected  with 
what  follows,  not  with  the  preceding  clause : 
In  the  tabernacle  of  the  daughter  of  Sion  poured  He 
out  like  fire  His  furx).  So  Blayney,  Gerlach, 
Naegelsbach.  Calvin  prefers  it.  The  Maso- 
rotic  punctuation  requires  it. — W.  H.  H.] — He 
poured  out  His  fury  like  fire.  The  figura- 
tive idea  of  the  outpouring  of  wrath,  conceived 
of  as  liquid  fire,  is  found  elsewhere  in  iv.  11  ; 
Hos.  v:  10;  Jer.  vi.  11  ;  x.  25;  xlii.  18  ;  comp. 
xiv.  16.  That  the  Poet  would  indicate  the  cap- 
ture and  destruction  of  the  city,  is  clear. 


II.  5. 

5  The  Lord  was  as  an  enemy :  he  hath  swallowed  up  Israel,  he  hath  swallowed  up 
all  her  palaces ;  he  hath  destroyed  his  strongholds,  and  hath  increased  in  the  daughter 
of  Judah  mourning  and  lamentation. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 
Ver.  5. — I'lmX,  in  Lam.  only  here  and  ver.  7.    Often  in  Jeremiah,  vi.  5 ;  ix.  20,  etc. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

According  to  Jer.  Iii.  13,  14  (see  also  6,  12), 
four  weeks  after  the  capture,  Nebuzaradan  had 
burned  'the  house  of  Jehovah,  the  house  of  the 
king,  all  the  houses  of  Jerusalem,  and  every 
great  house,'  and  destroyed  the  walls.  To  these 
facts  vers.  5-9  a  seem  to  refer,  though  they  relate 
only  to  the  destruction  of  the  palaces,  the  holy 
places  and  tlie  walls.  [The  particular  descrip- 
tion of  destruction  of  holy  places  begins  at  ver. 
6.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  5.  The  Lord  was  as  an  enemy.  The  Lord 
became  as  an  enemy.  This  is  specified,  first  of  all, 
as  the  cause  of  these  calamities.     As  an  enemy, 

see   ver.  4,  and   HJO 7N3  as  a  widow,  i.  1. — He 

TT   :   -  :  ' 

hath  swallow^ed  up  (see  ver.  2)  Israel,  He 
hath  svyallow^ed  up  all  her  palaces  ;  He 
hath  destroyed  his  strongholds,  hmol,  on 
tne  one  part,  and  the  palaces  and  strongholds,  on 


the  other,  are  to  each  other  as  the  people  and  the 
city.  Palaces  here,  as  remarked,  seem  to  corres- 
pond to  "the  king's  house"  and  "all  the  houses 
of  the    great    men,"    or    "every    great  house," 

Sl'lJn  n'3-S2)  in  Jer.  Iii.  13.  Strongholds,  see 
ver.  2. — He  hath  destroyed  his  strong- 
holds, is  a  quotation  from  Jer.  xlviii.  18.  Com- 
mentators differ  with  respect  to  the  sufiixes  in 
n'riijO'^X,  her  palaces,  and  VIVJD,  his  strong- 
holds. Some  think  the  feminine  suifix  her  refers 
to  the  daughter  of  Zion,  ver.  4,  the  masculine 
suffix  his  to  Israel.  Others  think  that  Israel 
itself  may  be  conceived  of,  at  one  time  as  the 
name  of  the  country,  at  another  as  the  name  of 
the  city.  [This  is  the  opinion  of  Gerlach,  who  re- 
fers to  avery  similar  instance  in  Hos.  viii.  14,  where 
the  feminine  suffix  is  attached  to  the  same  word  as 
here,  n'jHIjnjTN,  her  palaces,  and  where,  as  here 
the  masculine  would  be  expected. — W.  H.  H  ] 
J.  D.  MiCHAELis  would  read  H"'  r\'\^~)~}'^,  palaces  of 


76 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Jehovah.  Thenits  conjectures  that  H'-,  her,  has 
been  changed  into  V",  his,  by  the  omission  of  a 
stroke  of  the  pen.  But  all  the  commentators,  so 
far  as  I  see,  have  ovurlookeil  the  fact  that  the 
last  words  are  a  quotation.  lu  this  way  we  easily 
explain  the  masculine  suffix,  which  not  only  dis- 
agrees with  her  palaces,  but  violates  the  rule  by 
which,  every  where  else  in  the  Lainentationsi, 
Zion  is  conceived  of  as  a  female  person.  The 
word  is  either  a  very  old  scribal  error  for  Ij^lVir^p, 
thy  strongholds  (yet  the  Sept.  has  ra  bxoptjfiara 
ahrov),  or  the  Poet  has  chosen  the  suffix  that  best 
preserved  the  similarity  of  sound  with  the  origi- 
nal text.  He  could  do  this  in  virtue  of  the  greater 
freedom  which  prevails  in  the  Hebrew  with  re- 
spect to  denoting  the  gender.  See  my  Gr.,  g  60, 
4.  As  in  Ezek.  xxiii.  36-49,  where  Aholah  and 
Aholibah  are  spoken  of,  the  suffixes  are  con- 
stantly changed  (see  especially  ver.  46) ;  so  here 
also  possibly,  the  suffixes  are  changed  even  after 
a  masculine  or  feminine  idea  floated  before  the 
mind  of  the  Poet.  [The  mere  recurrence  of  two 
not  very  remarkable  words  in  succession,  can 
hardly  be  regarded  as  a  quotation.  But  unfor- 
tunately there  is  in  the  present  instance  a  dis- 
similarity which  is  very  prejudicial  to  the  idea 
of  a  quotation.     Here  we  read  V^^DO  nnt^;   in 

Jer.  xlviii.  18  it  is  T'^^^'^  nrWif,  and  our  author 
•iTT  :  • 


is  obliged  to  suppose  a  possible  scribal  error,  or 
to  invent  an  auricular  theory  of  quotation.  It 
seems  necessary  here  to  adopt  the  opinion  of 
those  who,  according  to  Rosenmueller,  refer 
the  masculine  suffix  to  God  and  tlie  feminine  to 
the  daughter  of  Zion.  He  swalloiccd  up  all  her 
palaces,  lie  destroyed  [lis  own  strongholds.  This 
is  not  to  be  discarded  as  a  mere  co7jJecture  where 
every  other  mode  of  interpretation  is  purely  con- 
jectural. It  is  recommended  by  the  arguments 
adduced  for  the  explanation  of  his  in  vei'.  3.  It 
avoids  the  difficulty  of  supposing  that  pronouns 
of  different  genders  refer  to  the  same  person. 
The  her  refers  to  the  ideal  person  Israel,  the 
daughter  of  Jerusalem.  Her  palaces  are  the 
habitations  of  the  people.  His  own  strongholds 
are  the  defences  of  Zion  which  is  His  habitation. 
Grammar  and  Rhetoric  both  coiiiMiend  this  ex- 
planation.— W.  H.  H.] — And  hath  increased 
or  multiplied  in  the  daughter  of  Judah,  see 
i.  15,  mourning  and  lamentation.  The  last 
words  in  the  original  are  a  beautiful  paronomasia, 
borrowed  from  Is.  xxix.  2,  ri'JXI  rT'JXn.     THen- 

T— ;|-      T--:|-         L 

derson:  "Sorrow  and  sadness."  Vitringa: 
Moeror  ac  moestitia.  Gerlach:  Betriibniss  und 
Trobsal.  Naegelsbach:  ^chzen  und Krdchzen'\. 
See  ^nin  inn.  Gen.  i.  2;  HNtl'pi  DNIK^,  Job  xxx. 
10  ;  n3C?pi  nopiJ^,  Ez.  XXXV.  3. 


II.  6,  7. 

6  And  he  hath  violently  taken  away  his  tabernacle,  as  if  it  were  of  a  garden ;  he 
hath  destroyed  his  places  of  the  assembly :  the  Lord  hath  caused  the  solemn  feasts 
and  Sabbaths  to  be  forgotten  in  Zion,  and  hath  despised,  in  the  indignation  of  his 

7  anger,  the  king  and  the  priest.  The  Lord  has  cast  off  his  altar,  he  hath  abhorred 
his  sanctuary,  he  hath  given  up  into  the  hand  of  the  enemy  the  walls  of  her  palaces  ; 
they  have  made  a  noise  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  as  in  the  day  of  a  solemn  feast. 

TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  6.— The  verb  DDfl  is  found  in  Jer.  xxii.  3;  xiii.  22.— 7]tJ?  for  :]b,  see  Crit.  note  below.— The  definite  article  in  -jJS 

is  in  accordance  with  recognized  pliilological  usage.  See  my  Gr.,  §  71,  4  a.  Drechsler,  Is.,  Vol.  ii.,  p.  203  n.  [The  definite 
article  was  used  in  comparisons  because  "  the  Hebrew  commonly  conceived  of  the  whole  class  of  objects  ot  which  he  spoke. 
See  Green's  Gr.,  I  245,  5  d.— W.  H.  H.]— nj7'lO,  the  first  time  is  used  of  festival  place  (see  Ps.  Ixxiv.  8  ;  comp.  1  Sam.  xx. 
35),  and  then  of  the  festival  itself  (see  i.  4).  [See  Ont.  note  fcetow.]- HDE?.  This  Piel  form  is  found  only  here.  It  must  be 
taken  in  the  accusative  sense.— n3ty  occurs  in  Jeremiah  only  in  xvii.  21-27,  where  the  profanation  of  the  Sabbath  is  referred 
to.— VXJ,  in  Lamentations  only  here  ;  in  Jer.  xiv.  21 ;  xxiii.  17  ;  xxxiii.  24.- D^I,  in  Lamentations  only  here ;  in  Jer.  x.  10 ; 

'  Ve'r.  Vr  njl,  three  times  in  Lam.,  ii.  7;  iii.  17,  31,  never  in  Jeremiah.— "'JIX,  see  i.  14  [Introd.  Add.  Rem.  p.  32].— 
IXJ.  This  verb  is  found  only  here  and  in  Ps.  Ixxxix.  40.  [Blaynet  renders  it  as  Niph.,  His  sanctuary  is  accursed,  but  con- 
jectures from  Sept.,  inreTiva^tv,  the  true  reading  may  be  I^J,  X  substituted  for  ^,  Be  hath  shaken  off  His  Sanctuary.  As 
the  meaning  could  only  be  conjectured  from  the  ancient  versions  (see  Alexanber,  Ps.  Ixxxix.  40),  it  is  not  improbable  that  the 
Sept.  gave  it  the  sense  of  i;; J.  So  Broughton,  cast  off,  and  Calvi.n,  repulit  vel  reje.cit  procul  ah  ammo  sua.  The  funda- 
mental signification  of  the  ve^rb  is  to  reject,  to  repudiate.  Fukrst  gives  the  Piel  sense,  to  cast  down  entirely,  to  repudiate,  to 
ryVct.  This  agrees  with  the  accepted  translation  of  Ps.  Ixxxix.  40.  The  sense  of  nhhor,  derived  from  a  coj^nate  Arabic  root, 
would  suit  that  place,  as  well  as  this ;  and  is  more  agreeable  to  the  corresponding  word  in  the  first  clause,  n  JI.  'f  the  f  iinda- 

Hiental  idea  of  HJI  is  to  be  foul,  to  stink,  as  Gesenius  says,  though  Puerst,  with  good  reason,  denies  this.     The  idea  of  a*- 

horrimi  or  oirejejing  with  disdain  or  disgust,  is  given  to  both  these  verbs  by  NAEGELSBAcn  and  GERi.Acn.  Naeoelsbach 
translates.  The  Lord  rejected  with  disdain  Bis  altar.  Be  alihorred  Bis  sanctuary,  and  Gurlach  just  reverses  the  expressions. 
The.  Lord  abhorred  Bis  altar.  Be  rejected  with  disdain  Bis  sanctuary.— W.  U.  II.]— ^-iprD,  See  i.  10;  ii.  20,  twice  in  Jere- 
miah, xvii.  12  ;  Ii.  .'il.- lUDH,  see  1  Sam.  xxiii.  20;  Ps.  xxxi.  0,  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah.  The  only  part  of  the  verb  he 
uses  i.i  the  Pual,  and  that' only  once,  xiU.  19.     [Nabqblsbach  translates  this  verb  "  verschloss,"  shut  up,  see  marg.,  E.  V, 


CHAF.  II.  6,  7. 


He  makes  no  remark  upon  its  meaning.    Fuerst  regards  *1JD  to  surround,  enclose,  Hiph.  to  shut  up,  and  "1 JQ  to  Jlow  out, 

-T  -T 

Hiph.  to  deliver  up,  as  entirely  distinct  Terbs,  and  says  tViat  "  all  attempts  to  unite  their  meanings  must  be  regarded  al 

failures." — W.  H.  II.] — n'mjD'^X.    The  connection  requires  us  to  understand  this  of  the  sanctuary,  altliougli  no  place  can 

be  cited  in  which   |iD*1X  is  used  of  the  Temple  ;  for  Jer.  xxx.  18,  to  which  some  appeal,  is  to  be  explained  otherwise :  Se« 

notes  on  that  place.    J.  D.  Michaelis  would  read,  JV  fi'lJOIK)  palace  of  Jehovah.— ^^JM  1)[),  see  Jer.  xxii. 

T  :    :  -  :|T        I 


.20. 


EXEGETICAL  AND   CRITICAL. 

[Vers.  6-10  describe  particularly  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  holy  places.  Here  God  claims  a 
special  property.  Everything  is  His.  The  em- 
phatic use  of  the  pronoun,  shows  that  it  is  also 
significant  in  ver.  5,  his  strongholds  as  distin- 
guished from  her  palaces. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  6.  And  He  hath  violently  taken 
av/ay  His  tabernacle  (marg.,  hedge)  as  if  it 
were  of  a  garden.  And  He  laid  waste  as  a  gar- 
den His  tabernacle.  The  meaning  of  the  verb  is 
to  use  violence,  to  offer  violence.  To  do  violence  to 
a  garden  is  to  lay  it  waste.  The  laying  waste  of 
a  garden  has  these  peculiarities ;  it  is  easily  done, 
it  is  in  some  sense  a  crime  against  nature,  and 
for  that  reason  a  garden  laid  waste  is  a  revolting 
as  well  as  a  sad  spectacle. — But  what  is  the 
meaning  of  the   word   'J|iJ',   translated  tabernacle 

(marg.,  hedge)  ?     That  it  stands  for  '^D,  cannot  be 

doubted.  "^D  constantly  denotes  that  sort  of 
(hiitte)  hut,  cot,  bower,  that  is  made  of  wicker- 
work  [or  plaited  twigs,  boughs],  also  lairs  of 
beasts  similarly  constructed,  Jer.  xxv.  88 ;  Ps. 
X.  9.  [J.  A.  Alexander:  "  The  Hebrew  word  is 
commonly  applied  to  any  temporary  shed  or 
booth,  composed  of  leaves  and  branches."  But, 
according  to  Fuerst,  the  word  is  derived  from 
'^^=io protect,  and  means  properly,  "the  cover- 
ing, protecting,  screening  thing  (not  a  thing 
woven  together  out  of  branches)  hence  a  covering, 
hut,  tent;  a  covert,  lair.'' — W.  H.  H.]  Then  it 
denotes  a  house  generally,  and  especially  the 
holy  tabernacle,  Jehovah's  house,  Ps.  Ixxvi.  3 ; 
as  does  also  5130,  Ps.  xviii.  12;  Job  xxxvi.  29: 
comp.  DI^D;  Am.  v.  26. — If  now  it  is  said,  that 
the  Lord  hath  done  violence  to  His  tabernacle  as 
to  a  garden,  the  tertium  comparationis,  the  point 
of  the  comparison,  consists  in  the  facility  with 
which  the  end  is  accomplished  and  in  the  contrast 
between  the  proper  condition  of  things  and  that 
which  the  laying  waste  has  produced.  As  easily 
as  one  might  root  up  plants,  fell  trees  and  plough 
the  ground,  has  the  Lord  overthrown  the  firm 
walls  of  His  sanctuary ;  and  as  sad  and  incom- 
prehensible as  the  appearance  of  a  devastated 
pleasure  garden  is  the  spectacle  of  the  sanctuary 
in  ruins.  The  comparison  is  the  more  apt,  be- 
cause the  city  of  God,  with  her  joyous  fountains, 
springing  from  the  dwelling-place  of  the  Most 
High  (Ps.  xlvi.  5  ;  comp.  Ixxxiv.  1-4),  could  with 
truth  be  called  niD'^'^J,  Jehovah's  garden  (Is.  li. 
3),  napadeiaoc  EvTioyiag,  a  Paradise  of  glory  (Sirach 
xl.  27).  [On  the  whole,  our  English  Version 
seems  best  to  express  the  true  sense  of  this  dif- 
ficult passage,  "and  He  hath  violently  taken 
away  His  tabernacle  as  if  it  loere  of  a  garden," 
i.  e.,  as  if  it  were  but  such  a  cottage  in  the  gar- 
den as  vinedressers  were  accustomed  to  build  till 


the  vintage  was  past.  So  Calvin.  This  inter- 
pretation involves  a  play  on  the  word  '^'Ht,  as  pro- 
perly meaning  a  ^crrc^ew  Aowse,  and  also  denoting 
Gods  tabernacle.— W.  H.  H.]— He  hath  de- 
stroyed His  places  of  the  assembly.  He 
destroyed  His  place  of  assembly  (Festort).  [So 
Henderson.  Noyes  :  place  of  congregation.  Blay- 
ney:  His  congregation.  It  is  better  (see  note  be- 
low), to  translate,  He  abolished  His  appointed  ser- 
vices, or  solemnities. — W.  II.  II.]— The  LORD 
hath  caused  the  solemn  feasts  and  Sab- 
baths to  be  forgotten  in  Ziou.  Jehovah  ex- 
terminated l^caused  to  be  forgotfen'\  in  Zion  festival 
\_appointed  times  of  Divine  service^  and  Sabbath. — 
The  result  af  the  destruction  of  the  place  for 
holding  festivals  is,  that  the  festivals  themselves 
can  no  longer  be  celebrated  and  are  forgotten. 
By  Zion,  not  Mount  Zion,  but  the  holy  city  gene- 
rally is  meant  [on  the  contrary,  in  the  strictest 
sense  the  holy  places  are  intended. — W.  H.  H.]. 
— And  hath  despised,  in  the  indignation 
of  His  anger,  the  king  and  the  priest.  And 
rejected  [so  Fuerst  also]  in  the  fury  of  His  wrath 
King  and  Priest.  Since  the  festivals  are  no  longer 
celebrated,  those  persons  who  were  appointed  to 
officiate  in  them,  are  by  their  omission  removed 
from  active  service.  That  the  kings  belonged  to 
this  class  of  persons  is  evident,  because  they 
were,  not  only  God's  representatives  to  the  peo- 
ple, but  also  intercessors  with  God  in  behalf  of 
the  people.  "The  Israelitish  king  (especially  in 
the  persons  of  David  and  Solomon)  bore  a  certain 
priestly  character,  in  that  the  king  at  the  head 
of  the  people  and  in  their  name  worshipped  God 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  brought  back  to  the 
people  the  Divine  blessing  (2  Sam.  vi.  17,  18;  1 
Kings  iii.  4;  viii.  14,  15,  etc.;  55,  56,  etc.;  62, 
63,  etc.;  ix.  25;  1  Chron.  xxix.  10,  11,  etc.;  2 
Chron.  i.  6;  comp.  Ez.  xlvi.  1-12)."  Oehler  in 
Herz.,  Real-Enc.  VIII.,  pp.  12,  13. 

"W.  That  this  word  stands  for  "^D  is  evident, 
because,  1.  W  and  D  frequently  are  interchanged, 
especially  in  the  later  language  (see  JO  and  ^W, 
2  Sam.  i.  22,  0^3  and  t^^^^,  D3"\  and  ^3^,  Ges. 
Thes.,  p.  931.  Ewald,  §  bQ  a).  \  We  find  in  Ex. 
xxxiii.  22  the  verbal  form  ^r\2\i}  for  ''i^il'D,  and  in 
Is.  V.  5  r\2Wl^  for  DDOO,  Mich.  vii.  4.     3.  Since 

T         :  T        : 

^DK?  and  nSltl'P  occur  only  in  the  places  cited, 
and  "^ity  is  found  only  here,  it  would  appear  that 
these  forms  are  not  so  much  indications  of  an  in- 
dependent root  ^3ti',  as  merely  different  ways  of 

writing  ^OD.  [When  Gerlach  says  that  lib 
never  means  hiitte,  a  cot,  tent,  or  tabernacle,  he  over- 
looks Ps.  Ixxvi.  3,  where  it  undoubtedly  de- 
scribes the  holy  Temple  as  God's  tabernacle  house 
or  dwelling-place.  To  his  argument  that  T^'JJ 
would  be  an  unsuitable  designation  of  the  Tem- 
ple, because  if  it  means  a  house  at  all,  it  can  or.ly 
mean  such  a  house  as  a  cot  or  bower  made  of 


78 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


twisted  branches  of  trees,  it  may  be  replied  ;  1. 
the  Temple  might  be  so  called  in  allusion  to  the 
ancient  tabernacle  which  was  temporary  and 
movable  ;  2.  "^iif  may  be  derived  from  "^D^if  in  the 
generic  sense  of  enclosing,  and  not  in  the  particu- 
lar sense  of  enclosing  with  a  hedge  or  fence,  as 
"SW  to  weave.  Indeed  Gerlacu  seems  to  give 
np  the  very  point  for  which  he  so  ably  con- 
tends, that  '!]i^  cannot  mean  a  house,  when  he 
gives  it  here  the  sense  of  an  enclosure  (Gehege) 
and  applies  it  to  the  whole  sacred  enclosure,  in- 
cluding of  course  the  Temple.  Henderson,  also, 
translates  the  word  His  indosure. — W.  H.  H.] 
The  Sept.  translates  Koi  diETrsTaaev  uq  a/nve?LOv 
ro  aKijvuiia  avrov  [He  tore  up  as  if  it  had  been  a  vine 
His  tabernadc'\.  It  would  seem  that  Job  xv.  33 
was  in  the  mind  of  the  translator,  where  it  is 
said,  1'1i?3  "jSJ^  Dion^  \_He  shall  shake  off  his  un- 
ripe grape  as  the  vine,  E.  V.  Ewald  accepts  (in 
his  3d  ed.)  the  Si>pt.  translation,  and  supposes 
|i3J3,  instead  of  JJ3,  to  be  the  true  reading.  To 
this  Gerlach  objects — 1.  That  DOn  cannot  mean 
to  tear  up,  to  pull  out;  2.  The  conjecture  that 
|£)J3  may  have  existed  in  the  t  ext  is  unnecessary, 
since  the  Sept.  translator  may  have  interpreted 
n  as  a  vineyard  and  translated  it  by  d//TrfAof=a 
vine,  as  C^S  is  translated  by  the  Sept.  in  Lev. 
XXV.  3,  4.— W.  H.  H.]  The  explanation  of  Pa- 
REAU,  RosENMUELLER  and  Kalkar,  et  violenter 
abripuit  sicut  sepem  horti  sepem  suam  [Notes  :  He 
hath  violently  torn  away  His  hedge,  like  the  hedge  of 
a  garden'],  according  to  which  |J3  would  be  taken 
for  I J  ^tS'?,  is  not  grammatically  allowable,  since 
such  an  omission  of  the  governing  word,  after 
the  particle  of  comparison,  could  only  occur 
where  the  context  necessarily  required  the  word 
to  be  supplied, — as,  for  example,  when  it  is  said. 
Is.  Ixiii.  2,  n:3  Ijltp  'inJ3  ["thy  garments  like 
the  garments  of  him  that  treadeth  in  the  wine- 
vat  "],  we  supply  the  idea  of  nJI  before  ^"|n,  be- 
cause the  garments  could  not  be  compared  to  the 
person  of  the  man  treading  the  wine-press.  So 
Gen.  xviii.  11  and  other  passages  which  might  be 
adduced  here,  are  to  be  explained.  See  my  Gr., 
2  65,  3,  note  103,  2.  But  in  our  passage  there  is  no 
necessity  for  supplying  ^tV  before  |J,  because  the 
laying  waste  of  the  house  can  very  well  be  com- 
pared to  devastation  of  a  garden.  The  explana- 
tion of  Thenius,  "  He  injured  that  which  was,  in 
respect  to  His  house  02'p,  standing  in  an  entirely 
subordinate  relation),  the  garden,  by  which  is 
meant  the  Temple  courts,"  is  altogether  too  arti- 
ficial. If  the  courts  could  be  called  the  garden 
of  the  Temple,  for  which,  however,  Thenius  ad- 
duces no  evidence,  why  did  not  the  Prophet  at 
once  call  it  simply  iSti'  |J?  [Gerlach:  "The 
translation  of  Thenius,  He  injured  as  the  garden 
of  Hi"!  tabernacle,  i.  e.,  that  which  was  the  garden 
with  respect  to  His  Tabernacle,  speaking  analo- 
gically (whereby  the  two  courts  surrounding  the 
Temple-edifice  and  connected  by  terraces,  would 
be  designated,  which  might  be  poetically  re- 
garded as  the  garden  belonging  to  the  Palace  of 
the  King  of  Israel),  requires  U  to  be  taken  in  the 
construct  case  in  spite  of  the  article — an  anomaly, 


for  the  justification  of  which  (see  Ewald,  §290, 
d;  Gesenius,  §108,  2,  n)  something  more  is  de- 
manded than  the  remark,  'UJi'  stands  in  an  en- 
tirely subordinate  relation,'  for  in  point  of  fact 
it  absolutely  determines  the  meaning  of  JJ,"=M« 
garden  of  His  tabernacle. — IJ^.ID.  This  word  oc- 
curs six  times  in  Lam.,  i.  4,  15 ;  ii.  6,  bis,  7,  22. 
Our  translators  render  it  in  fire  different  ways, 
and  in  this  verse,  where  it  occurs  twice,  in  two 
different  senses.  In  i.  4  ;  ii.  6  they  call  it  the 
solemn  feasts;  in  i.  15,  an  assembly;  in  ii.  6, 
places  of  the  assembly;  and  the  phrase  ^j^.''D  DV3. 
they  translate  in  ii.  7,  as  in  the  day  of  a  solemn  feast, 
and  in  ii.  22,  as  in  a  solemn  day.  TUut  the  word 
could  have  such  variety  of  meaning  in  such  close 
connection  is  improbable.  The  word  is  derived 
from  nj^\  to  appoint.  It  means  something  fixed, 
determined  upon,  appointed.  It  is  used  in  the  sense 
of  a  set  time,  an  appointed  place,  a  time  or  place  ap- 
pointed for  meeting  together,  especially  for  purposes 
of  religious  worship,  and  hence  the  regularly  ap- 
pointed and  observed  ordinances  or  services  of  wor- 
ship. As  connected  with  the  assembling  of  the 
congregation  for  worship,  it  is  not  unlikely  that 
the  word  acquired  some  ambiguity  in  its  use,  like 
our  English  word  church,  referring  sometimes  to 
time  or  place  of  service,  sometimes  to  the  people 
engaged  in  the  service,  and  sometimes  to  the  ser- 
vice itself.  But  we  can  always  trace  in  the  use 
of  the  Hebrew  word  its  original  signification  of 
a  set  or  appointed  time,  place  or  service:  and  ne- 
ver, perhaps,  has  it  the  simple  unqualified  mean- 
ing of  an  assembly,  a  congregation,  a  festive  occa- 
sion. There  is  no  necessity  of  ascribing  to  it  so 
many  significations  in  the  Lamentations,  and  two 
entirely  different  meanings  in  two  successive 
lines  of  this  one  verse.  In  i.  15  it  may  have  its 
primitive  meaning  of  a  set  time.  In  ii.  7,  22  the 
phrase  HJ^.ID  DV  may  mean  a  day  a/>/?om<erf,^xe<i 
upon,  predetermined,  for  any  especial  occasion.  In 
the  other  three  places,  where  it  occurs,  it  refers 
to  the  services  appointed  to  be  celebrated  in  the 
Temple.  The  reference  is  probably  to  the  daily 
services  of  sacrifice,  praise  and  prayer.  The 
cessation  of  the  annual  feasts  and  greater  festi- 
vals, which  were  of  infrequent  occurrence, 
would  not  be  so  remarkable  as  the  abrupt  and 
entire  cessation  of  morning  and  evening  prayer 
which  had  been  observed,  without  intermission, 
for  nearly  five  hundred  years,  or  ever  since  the 
Temple  was  first  consecrated. — There  is,  there- 
fore, no  real  difference  in  the  use  of  this  word  in 
the  Prophecies  of  Jeremiah  and  in  the  Lamenta- 
tions.—W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  7.  The  Lord  hath  cast  oB—The  Lord 
rejected  with  disdain — His  altar. — He  hath  ab- 
horred— He  abhorred — His  sanctuary.  The 
altar  and  sanctuary  are  recognized  as  the  central 
points  and  chief  places  of  Divine  worship.  By 
this  it  is  obvious  that  IthD'O,  sanctuary,  here  must 
signify,  not  in  its  widest  sense  the  Temple  gene- 
rally, which  has  been  already  sufficiently  indi- 
cated by  "^iif,  tabernacle,  and  ^4^0,  2:>lace  of  assem- 
bly, ver.  6,  but  in  its  narrower  sense  the  sanctu- 
tuary  proper,  the  Temple  which  contained  the 
Holy  place  and  Holy  of  Holies.  This  sense  best 
corresponds  with  n|3ID   [an  altar,  in  the  widest 


CHAP.  II.  8,  9. 


79 


sense,  or  place  where  oflFerings  are  made. — W. 
H.  H.].  foi-  not  the  altar  alone,  but  the  holy 
place  aii'l  the  holy  of  holies  were  places  of  offer- 
ing (Ex.  XXX.  1-lU). — He  hath  given  up — He 
gave  up — into  the  hand  of  her  enemy  the 
walls  of  her  palaces.  The  connection  requires 
us  to  understand  by  the  walls  of  her  palaces  the 
walls  of  the  sanctuary  [The  altar  is  treated 
with  contempt,  the  holy  places  are  defiled,  the 
edifice  itself  is  given  into  the  power  of  the  enemy, 
and  where  we  once  heard  the  voices  of  a  worship- 
ping people,  is  heard  now  the  wild  clamor  of 
heathen  idolaters. — W.  H.  H.] — They  have 
made  a  noise — they  shouted,  or  raided  a  cry  or 
clamor — in  the  house  of  the  LORD — in  the 
house  of  Jehovah — as  in  the  day  of  a  solemn 
feast  [lit.,  like  a  day — a  time  appointed,  which 
can  only  refer  to  some  regularly  appointed  festi- 
val of  the  church,  and  is  here  to  be  so  translated. 


though  we  might  render  in  conformity  with  ver. 
6  and  ch.  i.  4,  15,  a  day  of  appointed  religiom 
services,  with  reference,  however,  to  the  great 
festivals  of  the  church. — W.  H.  H.].  A  clamor, 
loud  as  a  festival  jubilee,  but  of  a  different  origin 
and  character,  is  heard  in  the  temple.  It  Is  a 
festival  for  their  enemies,  not  for  Israel  (i.  15). 
At  this  feast  Israel  is  the  victim  sacrificed. 
[Wordsworth  :  "  a  noise,  a  cry  of  jubilee.  There 
is  a  contrast  between  the  former  shout  of  festal 
joy  of  worshippers  in  the  Temple,  and  the  cry 
of  exultation  of  the  Chaldeans,   'Down  with  it! 

Down  with  it  to  the  ground  !' "     Gerlach:   "zip 

{cry)  is  not  to  be  understood,  with  Pareau  and 
RosENMUELLER,  of  the  war-cry,  but  of  the  shouts 
of  joy  and  triumph  on  the  part  of  the  enemy,  as 
the  comparison  with  the  jubilee-festival  shows 
(see  Is.  XXX.  29)."     See  crit.  note,  ver.  6.] 


II.  8,  9. 

8  The  Lord  hath  purposed  to  destroy  the  wall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion  ;  he  hath 
stretched  out  a  line,  he  hath  not  withdrawn  his  hand  from  destroying:  therefore 

9  he  made  the  rampart  and  the  wall  to  lament ;  they  languished  together.  Her 
gates  are  sunk  into  the  ground  ;  he  hath  destroyed  and  broken  her  bars  :  her  king 
and  her  princes  are  among  the  Gentiles :  the  law  is  no  more;  her  prophets  also  find 
no  vision  from  the  Lord. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  8.  The  LORD  hath  purposed— JeAowaA 
purposed — to  destroy  the  wall  of  the  daugh- 
ter of  Zion.  As  has  been  remarked,  we  are 
explicitly  informed,  Jer.  lii.  13,  14;  2  Kings xxv. 
9,  10,  that  four  weeks  after  the  capture  of  the 
city,  Nebuchadnezzar  had  destroyed  the  Temple, 
the  houses  and  the  city  walls.  Of  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  walls  the  passages  cited  speak  with 
special  emphasis  (Jer.  lii.  14  and  2  Kings  xxv. 
10),  "and  all  the  army  of  the  Chaldeans,  that 
were  with  the  captain  of  the  guard,  brake  down 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  round  about." — He  hath 
stretched  out  a  line — He  stretched  out  the  mea- 
suring-line. The  architect  employs  the  measuring 
line  in  order  to  build  correctly.  Jehovah  applies 
it  in  order  to  level  the  wall  to  the  ground  in  the 
most  literal  manner.  This  figure  substantially 
occurs  in  Amos  vii.  7-9;  the  expression  first  oc- 
curs in  Is.  xxxiv.  11  ;  2  Kings  xxi.  13  and  Job 
xxxviii.  5  [see  Zech.  i.  16.  Gerlach:  "The 
use  of  the  measuring  line  denotes  that  the  de- 
struction of  the  building  will  be  executed  with 
the  same  rigorous  precision  with  which  an  archi- 
tect carries  out  his  precouceived  plan.  Michae- 
Lis'  explanation  is  too  artificial;   'aline,  as  it 


TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  8.— n^nC'n.  often  in  Jeremiah,  ii.  30;  iv.  7  ;  xxxvi.  29,  etc.;  in  Lam.  only  here.— ID,  Jer.  xxxi.  39,  K'ri.— Kal  of 
73X  in  Jer.  xii.  11 ;  xiv.  2  ;  xxiii.  10 ;  Hiph.  only  in  Ez.xxxi.  15  and  here.— Sn>  not  in  Jer.— SSoX  is  used  in  a  precisely 
similar  way  in  Jer.  xiv.  2.  '    ' 

Ver.  9.— n3X,  Piel,  in  Lam.  only  here,  in  Jer.  often,  xii.  17  ;  xv.  7  ;  xxiii.  1 ;  li.  55.-131^,  in  Lam.  only  here  and  iii.  4, 
in  Jer.  xliii.  13,  comp.  li.  30.— n'13,  Jer.  xlix.  31 ;  li.  30.— jiin,  Jer.  xiv.  14 ;  xxiii.  16. 

were,  designated  the  extent  of  the  destruction, 
that  the  devastating  punishment  might  be  pro- 
portionate to  the  guilt.'  "  J.  A.  Alexander:  on 
Is.  xxxiv.  11.  "The  sense  of  the  metaphor  may 
be,  either  that  God  has  laid  this  work  out  for 
Himself  and  will  perform  it  (Barnes),  or  that  in 
destroying  He  will  act  with  equity  and  justice 
(Gill),  or  that  even  in  destroying  He  will  pro- 
ceed deliberately  and  by  rule  (Knobel),  which 
last  sense  is  well  expressed  in  Rosenmueller's 
paraphrase,  ad  mensuram  vastabitur,  ad  regulam 
depopulabitur,"  it  is  laid  waste  by  measure,  it  is 
depopulated  by  rule.  While  the  idea  of  the  tho- 
roughness and  completeness  of  the  work  of  de- 
struction, as  indicated  by  Gerlach,  suits  better 
here  than  any  of  the  other  explanations  suggested 
above,  and  is  undoubtedly  included  in  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words,  yet  the  main  thought  is,  that 
(roc?  ^mweZ/"  predetermined  the  extent  of  the  de- 
struction ;  Jehovah  purposed  it  and  He  stretched  out 
a  line  to  mark  its  beginning  and  its  end.  Human 
instruments  were  both  incited  and  restrained  by 
Him,  It  was  a  line  stretched  out,  not  after,  but 
before  the  destruction,  not  to  show  its  extent, 
but  to  define  its  limits,  "designed  to  point  out 
what  was  to  be  destroyed"  (Owen). — W.  H.  H.] 
— ;He  hath  not  v^ithdrawn  His  hand  from 
destroying   (marg.,  swallowing  up).     He  with' 


80 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


drew,  or  averted  not,  His  hand,  see  ver.  S,from 
devouring,  destroying,  swallowing  up,  see  ver.  2. 
[What  He  had  designed.  He  executed.  He  with- 
drew not  His  hand  till  the  full  measure  of  de- 
struction indicated  by  the  line  was  complete. — 
W.  H.  H.]. — Therefore  He  made — Then  made 
He — the  rampart  and  the  wall  to  lament — 
rampart  and  wall  mourn.  The  two  words,  ram- 
part and  wall,  are  united  as  here  in  Is.  xxvi.  1. 
"Rampart,"  bn  (see  2  Sam.  xx.  15;  Ob.  20)  is 
the  pnmoerium,  the  circumvallation,  or  the  smaller 
wall  in  front  of  the  chief  wall.  [Fuerst  :  "  The 
outermost  fence  of  fortifications,  the  glacis,  the 
(outermost)  rampart  around  the  city  walls,  pomce- 
rium,  TvpoTsixKTjua,  ante)niirale."  In  2  Sam.  xx.  15 
it  is  rendered  in  E.  V.  by  "trench,"  In  Ob.  20, 
not  expressed  in  E.  V.,  it  means,  according  to 
FuEHST,  a  province. — W.  H.  H.] — They  lan- 
guished together.  A  prosopopoeia,  as  in  the 
preceding  expression,  "He  made  rampart  and 
wall  mourn,"  and  in-i.  4.     Conip.  vers.  18,  19. 

Ver.  9.  [In  vers.  1-8  the  Lord  executing  His 
wrath  has  been  constantly  before  us.  Now  the 
work  is  done  :  and  in  vers.  9,  10,  we  are  atforded 
a  brief  glance  at  the  results,  after  the  catastrophe 
was  over. — W.  H.  H.]  Thefirstp:u-t  of  this  verse 
may  be  taken  as  a  continuation  and  conclusion 
of  the  foregoing  description;  or  as  merely  a  re- 
capitulation, by  way  of  transition  to  what  fol- 
lows. If  the  latter  is  correct,  then  the  gates  are  to 
be  regarded  as  a  part  of  the  walls,  and  with  the 
walls  sunken  into  the  ground.  But,  since  the 
gates  constituted  the  most  important  part  of  the 
walls,  and  were  in  fact  the  very  centres  of  public 
life  (see  their  use  as  Forums,  Dent.  xxi.  19  ;  Ruth 
iv.  1  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  9  ;  1  Kings  xxii.  10)  and  were 
moreover  the  keys  to  the  city,  we  may  regard 
them  as  representative  of  the  city  itself,  and  so 
understand  the  first  part  of  ver.  9,  as  a  compre- 
hensive conclusion  of  the  preceding  description. 
— Her  gates  are  sunk  into  the  ground.  The 
sense  of  the  verb  by  itself  (^O^  is  not  to  sink 
down,  but  to  siiik  into),  as  well  as  the  prefix  3, 
shows  that  V"^'<3  is  not  to  the  earth,  but  into  the 

I     VTT  1.  J 

earth.  The  ruined  gates  sink  into  the  earth,  and  on 
account  of  the  accumulation  of  ruins  are  buried 
beneath  the  level  of  the  ground.  [Assem.  Annot. 
"The  Jewish  Doctors  upon  the  place,  out  of  their 
Talmudists,  tell  us  strange  stories  of  the  gates 
of  Jerusalem  sinking  down  into  the  ground,  that 
they  might  not  come  into  the  enemies'  power,  be- 
cause they  were  the  work  of  David's  hands:  and 
some  of  ours  run  as  wildly  wide  another  way, 
expounding  it  of  the  Priests  and  Judges  that  were 
wont  to  sit  in  the  gates,  see  v.  14.  I  conceive  no 
more  to  be  meant  than  that  the  gates  were  thrown 
down  to  the  ground,  and  lying  along  there 
(such  of  them  and  such  parts  of  them  as  had  es- 
caped the  fire,  i.  4;  Neh.  i.  3;  ii.  3,  13,  17), 
were  bui-ied  in  the  rubbish  when  the  walls  were 
demolished.  See  Neh.  ii.  13,  14;  iv.  10."  Ger- 
l.\ch:  "This  is  said  of  tlie  gates  because  they 
were  so  completely  destroyed  (Pareau,  Thenius, 
buried  under  rubbiih),  that  no  more  trace  could  be 
seen  of  them  than  if  they  had  sunk  into  the 
ground,  not  because  (as  Michaelis  says)  the 
gates  overthrown  by  the  enemy  sunk  into  ditches 
dug  under  them."] — He  hath  destroyed  and 
bioken. — He  destroyed  and  broke  in  pieces  [litei"- 


ally  and  phonetically  shivered,  *13K'] — her  bars 

[thebarsthai  secured  the  gates,  see  Ps.  cvii.  10. 
— W.  H.  H.]. — Her  King  and  her  Princes  are 
among  the  Gentiles,  the  heathen.  From  this 
point  the  discourse  relates  to  persons  instead  of 
things.  If  the  king  and  princes  were  already 
among  the  heathen,  then  the  transportation  into 
exile  had  already  taken  place. — The  law  is  no 
more — there  is  no  laiv,  [Kein  Geselz  ist  mehr  vor- 
handen).  min,  law,  may  denote  by  itself  the 
whole  law,  a  particular  part  of  the  law,  or  the 
law  as  a  rule  of  conduct,  considered,  how- 
ever, subjectively  with  respect  to  the  theory,  i.  e., 
as  the  matter  of  instruction  (institutio,  doctriiut  is 
in  fact  the  fundamental  meaning  of  the  word)^ 
Add  to  this  that  T\'\\r\  TX,  ther^  is  7io  law,  may 
grammatically  refer  to  the  whole  preceding  sen- 
tence ("there  they  cannot  practise  the  law," 
Luther)  [the  King  and  Princes  are  among  the 
Gentiles,  where  they  cannot  observe  the  law];  or 
merely  to  O'lJ^,  among  the  Gentiles  ("who  have 
no  divine  revelation,"  Kalkar),  ["among  the 
Gentiles"  who  are  ''ivithout  law,'^  which  would 
be  a  correct,  translation  of  the  Hebrew.  Hugh 
Broughton  gives  this  sense  and  refers  to  Rom. 
ii.  14,  "Her  King  and  her  Princes  are  among 
the  heathen  that  have  no  law." — W.  H.  H.]  ;  or 
it  may  be  taken  as  an  independent  proposition. 
If   we  compare  such  passages  as  Jer.   xviii.  18 

(]ni)n  rr^'in  n^Xn-xS,  "the  law  shall  not  perish 

from  the  priest"),  Ez.  vii.  26  (tnbo  IDXn  n^im, 
"  but  the  law  shall  perish  from  the  priest "), 
Mai.  ii.  7  {'iT\'D:p  ^'^pA''.  Hl'mi,  "and  they  should 

seek  the  law  at  his  mouth  "),  we  would  incline  to 
the  opinion  that  mip,  law,  refers  only  to  instruc- 
tion out  of  the  law  and  administration  of  the  law 
by  the  priests.  But  why  then  are  not  the  priests 
named?  And  have  not  the  kings  and  princes, 
as  judges  and  guardians  of  the  legal  order  (  Dent, 
xvii.  8-20),  their  share  in  the  administration  of 
law?  I  believe,  therefore,  that  while  T^')^^\  Vi<, 
there  is  no  law,  is  to  be  taken  as  an  independent 
proposition,  it  is  to  be  understood  in  the  widest 
sense,  as  indicating  that  there  was  no  longer  any 
sort  of  administration  (whether  priestly  or  king- 
ly) of  the  law.  [Gerlach  adopts  the  translation 
Her  king  and  her  princes  are  among  the  heathen  with- 
out laio,  with  Luther's  explanation,  referring 
the  words  without  law  to  the  whole  preceding 
part  of  the  sentence,  "  Her  king  and  her  princes 
are  among  the  heathen  where  they  cannot  ob- 
serve the  law,  or  enjoy  it."  A  strong  objection 
to  this  is  that  it  transfers  our  thoughts  and  sym- 
pathies from  the  deplorable  condition  of  Jerusa- 
lem, which  is  here  the  subject  of  description,  to 
the  personal  condition  of  her  king  and  princes  in 
a  far  distant  land.  Besides,  the  very  structure 
of  the  sentence  leads  us  to  expect  something  di- 
rectly relating  to  the  daughter  of  Zion.  When 
we  are  told  that  her  king  and  her  princes  are 
among  the  heathen,  we  are  prepared  to  hear  of 
some  evil  resulting  to  her  from  their  absence. 
What  that  evil  result  is,  we  are  in  fact  informed 
if  we  understand  the  Poet  to  mean,  that  on  ac- 
count  of  the   absence   of   "her   king   and   li  r 


CHAP.  II.  8,  9. 


81 


princes,"  she  is  deprived  of  "the  law."  This 
agrees  substantially  with  Naegelsbach's  inter- 
pretation, but  he  has  erred  in  making  two  wholly 
independent  sentences  of  what  is  really  only  one, 
though  consisting  of  two  poetical  parts  as  the 
rhythmical  structure  requires.  The  correct 
translation  is — Her  king  and  her  princes  among  the 
heathen — there  is  no  law.  This  is  recommended  by 
the  two  arguments  which  Gerlach  very  forcibly 
urges  in  favor  of  his  rendering.  1.  It  is  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  Hebrew  accents,  which  Nae- 
GELSBACH  entirely  ignores  and  violates,  and 
which  connect  the  words  without  law,  or  there  is 
no  Zaw  with  what  precedes.  2.  "  This  explana- 
tion, agreeing  with  the  accents,  is  further  re- 
commended by  the  fact  that  the  two  last  mem- 
bers of  verse  9  describe  the  fate  of  those 
persons,  standing  to  the  city  in  the  relation 
of  Helpers  and  Counsellors  or  Comforters  (her 
king  and  her  prophets),  of  whose  help  and  coun- 
sel, or  comfort,  the  city  had  been  deprived,  even 
as  (according  to  the  first  member  of  ver.  9)  she 
had  been  deprived  of  the  external  means  of  pro- 
tection. It  is  the  deprivation  of  all  these,  for- 
merly the  medium  of  divine  help,  that  the  Poet 
mourns  (see  Hos.  iii.  4;  xiii.  10;  Is.  iii.  2)," 
Gf.klach.  Another  argument  for  the  translation 
suggested  is,  that  it  renders  a  verb  in  the  first 
part  of  the  sentence  unnecessary,  or  helps  us  at 
least  readily  to  suply  it.  If  we  make  two  wholly 
independent  sentences,  as  Naegelsbach  does, 
then  there  is  not  in  the  whole  book  a  similar  in- 
stance of  the  omission  of  .a  verb:  and,  indeed,  it 
is  somewhat  conjectural  what  verb  ought  to  be  sup- 
plied; the  simple  fact,  that  the  king  and  princes 
are  among  the  Gentiles,  is  not  of  itself  and  neces- 
sarily an  evil,  we  must  add  to  this  another  idea 
that  they  are  exiled,  or  imprisoned,  or  disgraced, 
or  suffering,  or  dying  among  the  Gentiles.  If,  on 
the  other  hand,  we  read  the  two  clauses  as  in- 
timately connected  and  interdependent,  as  the 
accents  imply,  then  the  proper  verb  in  the  first 
clause,  if  indeed  any  verb  is  necessary,  is  sug- 
gested by  the  last  clause,  and  the  construction  is 
not  wholly  unparalleled  in  the  book.  Her  king 
and  her  princes  among  the  nations — there  is  no  law, 
plainly  means  (Because),  her  king  and  her  princes 
(are)  among  the  nations — there  is  (for  her)  no  law. 
So  in  i.  2.  And  her  tears  on  her  cheek,  there  is  no 
comforter  to  her  from  all  her  lovers,  means  un- 
doub  edly,  and  her  tears  (are)  on  her  cheek  (be- 
cause) there  is  no  comforter,"  etc.  In  both  cases 
the  two  clauses  are  related  as  cause  and  effect, 
and  in  both  the  use  of  the  Hebrew  TX,  which  con- 
tains in  itself  the  verb  "to  be,"  prevents  what 
would  be  the  case  otherwise  and  what  would  be 
au  anomaly  in  this  book,  the  occurrence  of  a 
whole  sentence  without  a  single  verb  expressed. 
In  the  other  instances  in  this  book,  in  which  our 
English  translators  have  thought  it  necessary  to 
supply  the  verb  to  be,  its  omission  in  the  original 
is  highly  poetical  and  very  expressive  I.  4. 
"And  she  is  in  bitterness,"  H^-ID  XTII,  lit.  and 
the — bitterness  to  her,  and  i.  20,  "for  I  am  in  dis- 
tress," ' 7~^^~^3,  lit.  for  trouble  to  me,  are  Hebrew 
idioms  quite  synonymous  with  the  old  English 
forms  "woe's  her,"  "woe's  me!"  In  i.  22,  "for 
my  sighs  are  many,  and  my  heart  is  faint,"  lit. 
for  many  my  sighs,  to  my  heart  sickness,  the  omis- 
6 


sion  of  the  verb,  while  it  does  not  mar  the  sense, 
intensifies  the  expression,  when  these  words  are 
read  in  their  close  connection  with  the  preceding 
prayer.  So  in  our  text,  the  absence  of  the  verb 
is  due  to  the  broken,  rapid,  vehement  style  of 
the  poetry  of  passion ;  Her  king  and  her  princes 
among  the  heathen — there  is  no  law.  But  if  we  take 
the  first  clause  as  a  complete  and  separate  state- 
ment of  the  mere  fact  that  her  king  and  her 
princes  are  among  heathen,  the  omission  of  the 
verb  must  be  regarded  as  a  blemish  and  a  care- 
lessness of  which  the  writer  of  the  Lamentations 
is  no  where  else  guilty. — The  n  ''aning  oilaw,  ac- 
cording to  this  interpretation  is  obvious.  The 
law  of  the  land,  which  was  thelawof  God  as  espe- 
cially revealed  for  the  government  of  the  Jewish 
theocracy,  is  no  longer  observed  and  admin- 
istered, for  its  guardians  and  administrators,  the 
king  and  the  princes  are  in  exile.  All  "legal 
observances"  were  swept  away  (Henderson). 
The  law,  moral,  ceremonial  and  judicial,  as  re- 
garded its  administration  in  Juiea,  "  was  no 
more"  (Owen). — -W.  H.  II.] — Her  prophets 
also  find  no  vision  from  the  LORD.  Also  her 
prophets  receive  no  longer  vision  [revelation  from 
God,  divine  communication]  from  Jehovah.  These 
words  have  been  taken  as  evidence  that  the  Poet, 
in  the  whole  of  the  foregoing  description,  had  in 
mind  only  the  condition  of  the  Israelites  remain- 
ing in  the  land.  But  if  Jeremiah  received  an 
answer  to  the  question  which  he  put  to  the  Lord 
ten  days  after  he  asked  it  (Jcr.  xlii.  4,  7),  then 
it  could  not  be  said  that  the  prophets  could  re- 
ceive no  vision  from  the  Lord.  I  believe,  there- 
fore, that  the  Poet  here  had  in  mind  the  great 
body  of  the  people  who  had  been  carried  into 
exile.  Those  who,  with  their  king,  princes  and 
priests,  were  "among  the  lieathen,"  and  on  that 
account  "without  law,"  were  the  ones  who  were 
also  without  prophets.  [Not  the  people  as  such, 
whether  in  exile,  or  remaining  in  Juilea,  but  the 
ideal  person  of  "the  daughter  of  Zion"  (see 
vers.  1,  4,  8,  10)  is  the  subject  of  this  descrip- 
tion. That  her  gates  were  sunken  into  the  ground 
and  her  bars  broken  into  pieces,  localizes  the 
scene  depicted  in  Jerusalem.  It  is,  further,  her 
king  and  her  princes  who  are  "among  the  hea- 
then," 80  that  she  is  left  "without  law."  In 
strict  reference  to  this  mystical  personage,  repre- 
senting the  genius  of  the  theocratic  people  mourn- 
ing amid  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem,  it  is  now  added 
"  also  her  prophets  find  no  vision  from  Jehovah." 
To  suppose  the  Poet  in  the  first  clause  of  the 
verse  to  speak  of  Jerusalem,  and  in  the  two  fol- 
lowing clauses  of  the  people  in  exile,  is  to  cause 
au  abrupt  transition  from  one  subject  to  another 
subversive  of  all  unity  of  construction,  and  to 
cover  with  a  cloud  of  rhetorical  confusion,  in  ad- 
dition to  the  cloud  of  Divine  anger,  the  unique 
and  beautiful  conception  of  the  daughter  of  Zion 
sitting  solitary  and  forlorn,  weeping,  helpless 
and  comfortless,  amidst  the  ruins  of  the  theo- 
cratic city.  If,  as  Naegelsbach  argues,  it  could 
not  be  said  that  the  people  remaining  in  the  land 
were  without  "vision  from  Jehovah,"  because 
Jeremiah  received  an  answer  to  his  question  as 
related  in  Jer.  xlii.  4-7,  much  less  may  it  be  al- 
firmed  that  the  exiles  were  without  "vision  from 
Jehovah,"  since  at  that  very  time  Ezekiel  was 
exercising   his  prophetical  office   in  Babylonia. 


82 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


In  point  of  fact,  however,  the  time  of  which  the 
Poet  speaks  is  subsequent  to  the  period  referred 
to  in  Jer.  xlii.  4-7:  a  time,  not  only  succeeding 
the  destruction  of  the  city  and  the  transportation 
of  the  mass  of  the  people  to  Babylonia,  but  pos- 
terior to  the  flight  of  the  fugitives  to  Egypt, 
carrying  the  Prophet  with  them,  as  is  evident 
especially  from  Lam.  iv.  17-20;  v.  6,  9.  At  this 
time,  doubtless,  Jeremiah  himself  in  Egypt,  and 
Ezekiel  and  perhaps  Daniel  in  Babylonia,  and 
not  improbably  other  prophets,  whose  names 
have  not  come  down  to  us,  were  speaking  to  the 
people  as  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  How  then 
could  it  be  said  that  the  prophets  of  the  daughter 
of  Zioa  found  no  vision  from  Jehovah,  since 
whatever  was  spoken  by  a  prophet  of  God, 
whether  in  Jerusalem  or  at  any  distance  from  it, 
was,  according  to  our  theocratic  idea,  intended 
for  the  whole  church,  however  its  members 
might  be  scattered?  The  answer  is  that  her 
prophets  found  no  vision  from  Jehovah  which 
had  for  its  object  her  deliverance  from  her  pre- 
sent sorrows.  Her  material  defences  were  broken 
down,  her  natural  guardians  and  the  administra 
tors  of  her  laws  were  in  captivity,  and  her  pro- 
phets had  no  word  from  the  Lord  for  her  relief, 


her  help,  her  comfort.  Indeed  the  words  of  her 
prophets  at  this  time,  as  these  very  Lamentations 
show,  while  not  without  intimations  of  a  future 
deliverance,  destroyed  every  vestige  of  hope  of 
any  immediate  interposition  of  God  in  ht-r  behalf. 
Jeremiah  delivered  no  encouraging  prophecies  to 
the  Jews  after  the  city  was  destroyed.  There  is 
nothing  in  Ezekiel  of  an  encouraging  character, 
after  this  event  was  fully  consummated,  if  we  ex- 
cept the  obscure  visions  relating  to  a  remote 
future  in  the  \u.9t  chapters  of  his  book.  Daniel 
delivered  no  prophecy  containing  any  promise  of 
temporal  blessing  to  the  Jews,  till  towards  the 
very  close  of  the  captivity.  As  Scott  remarks, 
"  There  seems  to  have  been  at  this  period  a  very 
peculiar  suspension  of  that  information  and  en- 
couragement, which  the  prophets  had  for  many 
ages  been  employed  to  communicate  to  the  peo- 
ple. Except  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel  and  Daniel,  no 
prophet  is  mentioned  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  captivity,  when  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
were  raised  up.  This  chasm  was  an  evident 
token  of  divine  displeasure,  and  must  have  been 
a  very  sensible  aggravation  of  the  suffering  en- 
dured by  the  pious  remnant." 


II.  10. 

10  The  elders  of  the  daughter  of  Zion  sit  upon  the  ground,  and  keep  silence:  they 
have  cast  up  the  dust  upon  their  heads ;  they  have  girded  themselves  with  sack- 
cloth :  the  virgins  of  Jerusalem  hang  down  their  heads  to  the  ground. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  10.— V»">X^  Ol^'-  See  VIxS  ^-^-^p,  Jer.  x.iv.  2  [they  lie  nuniming  on  the  ground].— The{QTm)0T  (ae6  0L8H.,i  143, 

d,  265  c)  is  not  without  analogies  in  Jeremiali,  for  he  says  HDlJi  '"i-  14;  ny01i"1,  xiv.  17     [Fuerst  makes  the  word 

Niph.,  Davidson,  Kal.]—"l3y  Uoes  not  occur  in  Jeremiah  fnor  any  equivalent  for  it.— W.  H.  H.].— D'piy  Ojn,  seeJer. 
T  T  I"  ~         :  It 

iv.  8;  vi.  26;  xlix.3.— TliPli  Jer.  xlix.  16;  li.40. 


EXEGETICAL   AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  10.  To  the  dignitaries  of  the  Theocracy 
there  belonged  two  classes,  in  whose  sorrow  the 
grief  of  the  people  found  its  most  eloquent  expres- 
sion,— these  were  the  elders  and  the  virgins.  See 
i.  4,  18,  19.  [These  are  now  introduced  as  mourn- 
ing over  the  devastated  Zion,  the  absence  of  the 
law  and  of  prophetical  vision. — \V.  H.  H.] — The 
elders  of  the  daughter  of  Zion  sit  upon  the 
ground  and  keep  silence  [lit.  They  sit  on 
the  (/round,  they  keep  silent,  elders  of  daughter 
Zion'].  The  elders,  formerly  called  together 
to  give  counsel,  now  are  silent  without  any 
counsel  to  give.     [They  are  speechless,  not  only 


counselless.  They  have  no  words  even  for  sor- 
row. "  Small  griefs  are  eloquent, — great  ones 
dumb"  (Clarke). — W.  H.  H.] — They  have 
cast  up  dust  upon  their  heads — they  sprinkle 
dust  on  their  head.  [Lit.,  They  cast  up,  or  throw 
up  dust  upon  their  head.']  See  Josh.  vii.  6;  Job 
ii  12;  Ez.  xxvii.  30. — They  have  girded 
themselves  -with  sackcloth— ^/tcj/  gird  on  [or 
put  on]  sackcloth  [or  sacks]  — The  virgins  of 
Jerusalem  hang  do-wn  their  heads  to  the 
ground — The  virgins  of  Jerusalem  sink  to  the  earth 
their  head  The  virgins  also,  who  were  wont  to 
be  called  officially  to  act  as  the  mouth-piece 
of  the  people,  when  the  feeling  of  general  joy  was 
to  be  expressed,  now  are  dumb  and  hang  dowa 
their  heads  to  the  ground. 


CHAP.  II.  11-22. 


PART  II. 

II.  Vers.  11-22. 

JD  Ver.  11.  Mine  eyes  failed  with  tears, 
My  bowels  were  troubled, 
My  liver  was  poured  on  tlie  ground. 

For  the  ruin  of  the  daughter  of  my  people,^ 
Because  child  and  suckling  fainted  away 
»  In  the  streets  of  the  city ! 

7  Ver.  12.   To  their  mothers  they  say — 

Where  is  corn  and  wine  ? — 
Whilst  they  fainted  as  the  wounded 

In  the  streets  of  the  city, — 

Whilst  they  poured  out  their  soul 

Into  their  mothers'  bosom. 

0  Vee.  13,   What  can  I  testify  to  thee  ? 

What  liken  to  thee,  thou  daughter  of  Jerusalem? 
What  compare  to  thee, 

That  I  may  comfort  thee,  daughter  of  Zion  ? 
For  great  as  the  sea  is  thy  ruin ! 
Who  can  heal  thee? 
J  Ver.  14.   Thy  prophets  predicted  for  thee  - 

Falsehood  and  delusion, 
And  uncovered  not  thy  guilt 

To  avert  thy  captivity. 
But  then  they  predicted  for  thee 
False  burdens  and  expulsions  1 

D  Ver.  15.  All  that  passed  by  the  way 

Clapped  their  hands  at  thee ; 
They  hissed  and  wagged  their  head 

At  the  daughter  of  Jerusalem. 
Is  this  the  city  of  which  they  used  to  say — 

Perfect  in  beauty, — Joy  of  the  whole  earth? 
Q  Ver.  16.  All  thine  enemies 

Gaped  at  thee  with  their  mouth, 
They  hissed  and  gnashed  the  teeth ; 

They  said, — We  have  utterly  destroyed— 
Yea,  this  is  the  day  we  have  looked  for — 

We  have  found  [it] — we  have  seen  [it]  I 

^  Ver.  17.   Jehovah  did  what  He  purposed : 

He  fulfilled  His  word 
That  He  commanded  in  the  days  of  old. 

He  demolished  and  pitied  not. 
He  made  the  enemy  joyful  over  thee ; 

He  exalted  the  horn  of  thine  adversaries: 
^  Ver,  18.   Their  heart  cried  out  unto  the  Lord. 

O  wall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion, 
Let  tears  run  down  like  a  river 

Day  and  night. 
Give  thyself  no  rest, 

Let  not  the  daughter  of  thine  eye  cease. 


K4  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 

p  Ver.  19.   Arise — cry  in  the  night — 
'  In  the  beginning  of  the  night  watches  ; 

Pour  out  thy  heart  like  water 

Before  the  face  of  Jehovah  : 
Lift  up  thy  hands  to  Him,  for  the  life  of  thy  young  children, 
That  faint  for  hunger,  at  the  head  of  every  street. 

■^  Ver.  20.  See,  Jehovah,  and  look ! 

To  whom  hast  Thou  done  this  ? 
Should  women  eat  their  fruit — 

Children  whom  they  have  nursed  ? 
Should  Priest  and  Prophet 

Be  slain  in  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord  ? 
^  Ver.  21.   The  boy  and  the  old  man 

Lay  on  the  ground  in  the  streets. 
My  virgins  and  my  young  men 

Fell  by  the  sword. 
Thou  hast  killed — in  the  day  of  Thy  wrath — 

Hast  slain — hast  not  pitied  ! 
n  Ver.  22.   Thou  callest  together,  as  on  an  appointed  day  of  solemnity, 

My  terrors  from  round  about. 
And  thp'-e  was  not,  in  the  day  of  Jehovah's  wrath, 

One  Iliac  escaped  or  was  exempt. 
Those  I  have  nursed  and  brought  up — 

My  enemy  consumed  them. 

ANALYSIS. 

\These  verses,  strictly  speaking,  constitute  the  lamentation,  for  which  the  preceding  description  has  prepared 
the  way  and  furnished  the  theme. — W.  H.  H.]  In  ver.  11  the  Poet  describes  his  aim  suffering,  espe- 
cially as  produced  by  the  terrible  fate  of  the  starving  children  and  their  mothers,  ver.  12.  In  vers.  13, 
14  the  Poet  seeks  to  inform  us  of  the  extent,  and,  at  the  same  time,  of  the  moral  cause,  of  their  misfor- 
tunes. In  vers.  15,  16  he  describes  the  malicious  rejoicings  of  their  enemies.  In  ver.  17  he  draws  at- 
tention to  the  fact  that  the  great  catastrophe  was  simply  the  punishment  of  disobedience,  which  God  had 
long  determined  upon  and  predicted.  Vers.  18,  19  are  an  exhortation  to  a  prayer  of  wailing,  addressed 
to  the  personified  ivall  of  Jerusalem  \_Zio7i'].  To  this  exhortation  vers.  20-22  are  the  response.  So  this 
chapter  closes,  like  ch.  i.,  with  a  sort  of  prayer,  which,  however,  is  not  a  direct  prayer,  but  only  up- 
braids God  by  asking  how  He  could  have  permitted  such  horrible  and  outrageous  crimes  ! 

II.  11,  12. 

11  Mine  eyes  do  fail  with  tears,  my  bowels  are  troubled,  my  liver  is  poured  upon  the 
earth,  for  the  destruction  of  the  daughter  of  my  people ;  because  the  children  and 

12  the  sucklings  swoon  in  the  streets  of  the  city.  They  say  to  their  mothers,  Where 
is  corn  and  wine  ?  when  they  swooned  as  the  wounded  in  the  streets  of  the  city, 
when  their  soul  was  poured  out  into  their  mothers'  bosom. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  11.— Dri'J'y  ^'12,  i"  Jer.  xiv.  6.— The  plural  ^nJ^D^,  only  here  and  Ps.  Ixxx.  6.  Jer.  uses  only  the  Sing.,  viii. 
23  ;  ix.  17 ;  xiii.  17  ;  xiv.  17  ;  xxxi.  16. — [The  Niph.  ^31^ J  cannot  have  active  sense,  which  Naegelsbach  gives  it,  nor  is  this 
necessary  to  his  interpretation  of  the  passage.— W.  H.  il.]— 133,  the  liver  (never  in  Jer.),  see  Ex.  xxix.  13,  22;  Lev.  iii.  4, 
etc.,  80  called  because  minium,  viscerum  et  gravissimum  et  densissimum  est  (Galen,  de  usupartium,  6,  7,  in  Ges.  Thes..  p.  656X 
[Sept.  translates  it  r/  Sofa  /uoO,  my  glory.  But  the  undoubted  use  of  the  word  as  meaning  the  liver,  and  its  conmition  here 
with  «i^es  and  ioioeZs,  arc  conclusive.— W.  H.  H.J— ''I3_i;-r\3  "UB?,  is  entirely  Jeremiac,  vi.  14  ;  viii.  11,  21.  Again  in  Lam 
iii.  48  ;  iv.  10.— Verb  ntOJ^,  tbree  times  in  this  chap  ,  vers.  11,  12,  19;  never  in  Jer.- pjri  SVl^.  Comp.  Jer.  xliv.  7.^ 
^n".  and  iT'^p,  not  unusual  in  .Ter.,  v.  1;  ix.  20;  xlix.  25. 

Ver.  12.— The  Hithp.  "nDnE/n,  besides  here,  only  in  iv.  1  and  Job  xsx.  16.— p'H,  Jer.  xxxii.  18. 

•with  tears — mine  eyes  have  become  dim  in  conse- 
quence of  tears  \jnine  eyes  failed  with  tears ;  Old 
English,  were  spent,  Broughton.  The  ej'es  are 
represented  as  exhausted,  worn  out,  by  weeping. 


EXEGETICAL    and   CRITICAL,. 

In  vers.  11,  12  the  Poet  proceeds   to  describe 


his  own   grief.     Ver.  11.    Mine  eyes  do  fail  1  — W.  H.  H.].     See  Jer.  xiv.  6;  Lam.  iv.  17  ;  Ps. 


CHAP.  II.  11,  12. 


85 


ixix.  4;  cxix.  82,  123. — My  bowels  are  trou- 
bled— my  bowels  are  tumultuously  moved.  See  i. 
20.  He  depicts  his  sorrowful  emotions  by  show- 
ing how  his  eyes  and  bowels  have  become  affected 
by  them.  [Bowels,  here  as  elsewhere,  are  used 
in  a  sense  entirely  figurative.  His  eyes,  literally, 
wept.  But  the  poet  never  intended  to  indicate 
the  literal  movement  of  his  bowels  as  an  evidence 
of  his  grief.  The  bowels,  according  to  Hebrew 
habits  of  thought  and  expression,  were  the  seat 
of  mental  emotions,  especially  of  a  painful  na- 
ture. His  tears  kept  pace  with  his  agony  of 
mind.  A  correct  translation  would  be,  my  soul 
was  greatly  moved.  See  notes  on  i.  20.  The 
verbs  in  this  verse  are  preterites,  and  ought  to 
be  so  rendered. — W.  H.  H.] — My  liver  is 
poured  out  upon  the  earth — ?7iy  liver  has 
fallen  out  to  the  earth  [lit.,  tvas  poured  out  on  the 
ffround'].  The  pouring  out  of  the  liver  caunot  be 
unde.'Stood  as  if  it  were  emptied  of  its  fluid  con- 
tents, for  it  has  no  such  contents.  Nor  can  we 
say  that,  properly  speaking,  the  flowing  out  of 
the  bile,  caused  by  compression  of  the  liver,  is 
intended.  So  Fuerst,  who  explains  this  text  by 
Job  xvi.  13.  For  in  that  case,  the  bile  should 
be  designated  as  being  poured  out.  Rather,  the 
Poet  would  say,  that  the  liver  itself  falls  out 
from  him,  as  it  were  ;  as  we  say  that  a  man's 
heart  falls  out  from  him  [that  he  loses  heart?]. 
The  liver  is  thus  evidently  regarded  as  the  seat 
of  emotions,  the  reverse  of  those  which  at  that 
time  controlled  the  Poet.  The  liver  is  described 
as  the  seat  of  pleasure  and  courage  (see  De- 
LiTZscH,  Psychologie,  IV.,  1 13,  p.  228,  1st  ed.; 
p.  268,  2ded.).  The  falling  out  of  the  liver, 
then,  denotes  the  loss  of  all  joyousness  and  cou- 
rage; and  is  conceived  of,  it  would  seem,  as  the 
consequence  and  climax  of  the  fermentation  of 
the  viscera  in  general,  described  in  what  pre- 
cedes. The  whole  phrase  is  peculiar  to  this  pas- 
sage. [The  physiological  explanations  of  many 
commentators  (see  Blaynet,  Henderson)  require 
us  to  regard  the  Poet  as  sutFering  from  bilious 
diarrhoea.  The  Hebrews  (probably  not  so  well 
versed  in  physiology  as  the  commentators  ima- 
gine) identified  ihQ  physical  life  with  the  substance 
of  the  soul,  and  associated  mental  activity  with  the 
organs  and  functions  of  physical  vitality,  locating 
intellectual  action  in  the  head  and  heart,  and 
purely  emotional  in  the  heart  and  lower  viscera, 
as  the  liver  and  the  boivels.  Remembering  this, 
we  may  dismiss  the  unpleasant  suggestions  of 
the  movement  of  the  bowels  and  ejection  of  bile 
from  the  liver,  in  the  literal  sense,  and,  escaping 
the  painful  presumptions  of  colic  and  jaundice, 
allow  our  Poet  to  express  the  anguish  of  his  soul 
in  the  metaphorical  language  of  his  race.  The 
liver  is  here  regarded,  says  Notes,  as  the  seat  of 
feeling,  and  its  being  poured  out  on  the  ground, 
remarks  Gerlach,  is  explained  by  such  analo- 
gous expressions  as  Ps.  xlii.  5, 1  pour  out  my  soul ; 
Job  XXX.  16,  My  soul  is  poured  out.  "Here,  as 
with  regard  to  many  other  of  the  bodily  organs 
as  mentioned  in  Scripture,  there  is  not  only  a  li- 
teral sense  capable  of  universal  interpretation, 
but  a  metaphorical  import  that  cannot  be  com- 
municated by  any  literal  version,  unless  when 
the  same  metaphorical  signification  happens  to 
exist  also  in  the  language  into  which  the  trans- 
lation is  made.     Dr.  J.  M.  Good  touches  on  this 


subject  in  the  Preface  to  his  Translation  of  the 
Song  of  Songs,  and  is  disposed  to  contend  that 
such  allusions,  in  order  to  convey  their  real  sig- 
nification, should  be  rendered,  not  literally,  but 
equivalently ;  and  we  so  far  agree  with  him  as 
to  think  that  the  force  and  delicacy  of  many  pas- 
sages must  be  necessarily  impaired  and  their  true 
meaning  lost,  when  the  name  merely  is  given,  in 
a  language  where  that  name  does  not  involve  the 
same  metaphorical  idea.  *  *  *  Among  our- 
selves the  spleen  is  supposed  to  be  the  region  of 
disappointment  and  melancholy.  But  were  a 
Jew  to  be  told,  in  his  own  tongue,  that  the  ini- 
mitable CowPER  had  long  labored  under  the 
spleen,  he  would  be  ignorant  of  the  meaning  of 
his  interpreter;  and,  when  at  last  informed  of  it, 
might  justly  tell  him  that,  although  he  had  lite- 
rally rendered  the  words,  he  had  by  no  means 
conveyed  the  idea"  (The  Pictorial  Bible). — VV.  H. 
H.] — For  the  destruction — on  account  of  the 
ruin — of  the  daughter  of  my  people,  be- 
cause the  children  and  the  sucklings 
swoon  (marg.,  faint)  in  the  streets  of  the 
city.  [Lit.,  in  the  languishing  ov  f aiming  of  child 
a7id  sucking- babe  in  the  streets  of  the  city.'\  The 
Poet's  grief  was  caused  by  the  ruin  of  his  people 
in  general,  but  especially  by  the  frightful  suffer- 
ings of  the  poor  children,  which  he  represents  as 
the  very  acme  of  the  calamity. 

Ver.  12.  The  Poet  describes,  in  a  manner  gra- 
phic and  true  to  nature,  what  he  had  said  in  a 
general  way  (ver.  11)  of  the  wasting  away  of  the 
children.  The  strokes  of  his  pencil  are  few  in 
number,  but  suffice  to  place  before  our  eyes  an 
exact  picture  of  those  heart-rending  scenes. — 
— They  say  to  their  mothers — To  their  mo- 
thers they  said.  The  imperfect  (•TIOK'')  is  used  to 
indicate  an  act  in  the  past  often  repeated.  Comp. 
my  Gr.,  ^  87,/.  For  it  is  evident  the  Poet  de- 
scribes a  past  condition  of  things,  namely,  that 
ensuing  on  the  capture  of  the  city.  At  that  time, 
when  neither  the  famished  city  (see  Jer.  Hi.  6), 
nor  the  conqueror,  who  had  no  time  then  to  think 
of  it,  furnished  the  means  of  subsistence,  the  fa- 
mine must  have  been  at  its  highest  stage.  [The 
word,  which  is  future  in  form,  should  undoubt- 
edly be  translated  by  our  present.  So  E.  V., 
Calvin,  Brocghton,  Bi,ayney.  Henderson, 
Gerlach.  It  is  an  instance  of  the  future  used, 
as  our  present  is,  in  graphic  descriptions.  See 
ver.  ],  ^''i^'',  covers.  To  their  mothers  they  say. 
— W.  H.  H.]— "Where  is  corn  and  wine? 
Corn  (pi)  wiiich  usually  occurs  in  connection 
with  grapes  (K/H'P,  see  Jer.  xxxi.  12),  here  de- 
notes, neither  baked  bread  alone,  as  most  com- 
mentators think,  nor  only  roasted  corn,  parched 
corn,  as  Thenius  would  have  it.  For  the  hun- 
gry children  longed  only  for  food  in  general 
[not  for  a  particular  kind  of  food].  Corn, 
here,  is  to  be  taken,  therefore,  in  the  gene- 
ral sense,  which  DP)/,  bread,  formerly  had,  a 
meaning  which  the  word  seems  to  have  in 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  24  also,  where  the  manna  is  called 
corn  of  heaven,  D^P^'UI-  The  Poet  does  not 
say,  but  every  one  feels,  how  this  question, 
which  they  could  not  answer,  must  have  cut 
into  the  hearts  of  those  mothers. — When  they 
swooned — whilst  they  fainted  [lit.,  in  fainting] 


86 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEllEMIAH. 


The  prefix  3,  in,  here  has  a  temporal  sense:  they 
said  so  whilst  they  were  wasting  away.  [So  in 
the  last  clause.  In  breathing  out  their  soul,  i.  e., 
they  said  so,  whilst  they  were  dying.  Cran- 
mer's  Bible  gives  a  free  translation,  but  admira- 
bly expresses  the  sense  of  the  whole  verse. 
"Even  when  they  spake  to  their  mothers:  where 
is  meat  and  drink?  For  while  they  so  said,  they 
fell  down  in  the  streets  of  the  city,  like  as  they 
had  been  wounded  and  some  died  in  their  mothers' 
bosom.'— W.  H.  H.].— As  the  wounded  in 
the  streets  of  the  city.  Although  not  wounded, 
yet  they  died  a  painful  death  as  the  wounded  do. 
[The  idea  rather  is,  not  necessarily  that  they 
died,  all  of  them  at  least;  but,  overcome  with 
weakness  and  suffering,  many  of  them  fell  sud- 
denly in  the  streets  as  if  wounded,  whilst  others 
died  in  their  mothers'  bosom. — W.  H.  H.] — 
"When  their  soul  was  poured  out — whilst 
breathing    out  their  soul — [lit.   in  breathing   out']. 


The  soul  pours  itself  forth,  whilst  the  breath 
streams  out.  It  is  also  the  same  as  expirare, — • 
into  their  mothers'  bosom — in  the  lap  of  their 
mothers.  Thenius  would  understand  the  bosom. 
But  the  mothers  are  regarded  as  sitting  on  the 
ground,  and  the  children  lying  in  their  laps. 
[^Bosom  is  better.  There  were  children  of  all  ages 
among  those  alluded  to.  Some  old  enough  to  seek 
for  food  themselves  and  fall  down  in  the  streets 
of  the  city.  Some  able  to  ask  in  words  for  food 
and  drink.  Others  suc/clitigs,  ver.  11,  and  tliese 
doubtless  are  especially  meant  as  breathing  out 
their  soul  in  their  mothers'  bosom  while  vainly 
seeking  nourishment  at  the  breast. — W.  H.  H.] 
Thenius  rightly  draws  attention  to  the  Hithpael 
forms  of  the  verbs  in  rhe  second  and  third  clauses 
(DDtpirnn  and  ^iJ'Z't^n).  These  indicate  how  the 
children  struggled,  and  how  intense  the  condi- 
tions of  their  wasting  away  and  expiring  were. 


II.  13-14. 


13  What  thing  shall  I  take  to  witness  for  thee?  What  thing  shall  I  liken  to  thee, 
O  daughter  of  Jerusalem  ?  What  shall  I  equal  to  thee,  that  I  may  comfort  thee, 
O  virgin  daughter  of  Zion  ?  for  thy  breach  is  great  like  the  sea ;  who  can  heal  thee  ? 

14  Thy  prophets  have  seen  vain  and  foolish  things  for  thee  ;  and  they  have  not  dis- 
covered thine  iniquity,  to  turn  away  thy  captivity ;  but  have  seen  for  thee  false 
burdens,  and  causes  of  banishment. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

■Ver.  13. — The  K'tib  ^IIJ^K  is  certaiuly  wrong,  since  "^H^  is  never  used  in  Kal.    We  must  read,  therefore,  according  to 

the  K'ri  'HT'J.'X-    The  meaning  of  T'J^n  is  to  give  testimony,  bear  witness.     The  person  wliom  the  testimony  concerns  is 

usually  indicated  by  3.     Yet  there  are  three  places  where  the  accusative  in  the  form  of  a  suffix  .stands  in  the  place  of  3.     Of 

the  witnesses  who  were  brought  forward  against  Naboth,  it  is  said,  1  Kings  xxi.  10,  ^ni>'"1>  and  in  ver.  13,  ^ri^J/''^-     ^° 

Job  xxix.  11   it  is  said,  and  here  in  a  good  sense  {hotiam  partem)  ''JT'^ym  Hj^X"^  T^'I.     According  to  these  aud  other 

analogies,  which  are  placed  together  in  my  Gr.,  J  78,  we  may  take  tlie  suffix  here  as  denoting  the  remoter  object  in  the 
dative  case.  [So  Sept.  :  Tt  /u.apTupi)o-<o  crot.  Calvin:  Quid  cnnUstabor  tihi.  Hoothroyd:  WIuU  shall  1  testify  in  IheeJ  The 
words  have  been  variously  rendered.  Cka.nmer's  Bible  :  Wlmtsliall  I  sayoftheef  Bisii.  Bible.  :  "What  shall  I  siiy  unto  thee?" 
Brouoiiton:  What  testimony  shall  I  brimi  for  thee  t  Blaynky  :  What  shall!  urge  to  thee?  Henderson:  What  shall  I  take 
to  witness  *  carelessly  overlooking  the  suffix.    Notes  :  How  shall  1  address  t/iec  /J— The  Piel  n31  is  comparare,  conferre,  to 

compare  one  thing  with  another.  See  Is.  xlvi.  5  ;  xl.  18.  25 ;  Song  Sol.  i.  9.  Only  the  Kal  occurs  in  Jer.  vi.  -2.— The  Hiphil 
mU^n,  which  occurs  only  here  and  Is.  xlvi.  5,  has  the  same  signification,  no  form  of  the  verb  niiy  is  found  in  Jeremiah. — 

D'bo'-IT'  nSri-     In  tl^e  Lamentations  only  here  and  v.  15,  never  in  Jeremiah.    [The  definite  article  here  is  emphatic,  aud 

is  well  rendered  by  Naeoelsbach,  "  tlwu  daughter  of  Jerusalem."— W.  U.  H.]— IjOH  JXV    The  Piel  DH  J  in  Jer.  xvi.  7  ;  xxxi. 

13.     [The  force  of  1  here  is  to  express  the  end  or  design,  that  1  might  comfort  titee.    CiLVlN].— *-^-r\3  rt7in3,  see   i.  15.— 

□13  '7nj-'3.    The  expression  is  found  only  here  :  yet  comp.  Jer.  vi.  23 ;  1. 42.— T^iy.  Very  frequent  in  Jeremiah,  see  ver. 

ll.—^tj-^j  Jeremiah  uses  frequently,  iii.  22 ;  viii.  22  ;  xvii.  14,  e<c.,  but  never  in  construction  with  7.— [The  future  form  of 

the  verlis,  which  Naeoelsbach  renders  as  simple  presents,  express  an  optative  sense,  what  may,  can  or  shall  I  testify,  etc.— 
W.H.  II.]  , 

Ver.  14. — Verb  Hin  Jeremiah  never  uses. — Tvll,  which  Jeremiah  uses  not  infrequently,  xi.  20;  xsxiii.  6;  xlix.  10,  is 

I  T  T  T  ' 

construed  with  7  W  only  here  and  iv.  22.  The  significance  of  this  construction  is,  the  disclosing  of  a  matter  before  con- 
cealed. [The  phrase  is  elliptical ;  they  had  not  removed  that  which  covered  their  iniquity  as  a  veil  (Calvin,  Gerlach,  Rosen- 
MUELLF.R,  etc.).  Blatnet  :  "  For  Sy  the  Syr.,  seems  to  have  preserved  the  true  reading  7] 7-"  Besides  the  lack  of  authority 
for  this  emendation  of  the  text,  the  recurrence  of  this  verb  with  ^_J>  in  iv.  22,  seems  conclusive.— W.  H.  H.]—|'|J?^  Jeremiah 
often  uses  ii.  22;  iii.  13  ;  xiii.  22,  etc.— TUn  singular  Xt^O,  in  sense  of  effatum,  is  found  in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  familiar  pas- 

T  ~ 

sage  xxiii.  33-40,  where  he  forbids  the  use  of  this  expression.  The  plural  occurs  only  here.— XltV  in  Jeremiah  only  in  the 
adverbial  expression  Xltl'S.  ii.  30;  iv.  :'.0;  vi.  23;  xviii.  15;  xlvi.  11;  whilst  in  Ezokiel  we  find  X1C  jUH.  xii.  24;  iliriO 
tiW,  xiii.  17 ;  XIC'-DD  ?•  ^^'-  -8  — D'H-llO  is  an-.  \ey. ;  ri'lH  means  dctrusit.  Ps.  v.  11,  expulit,  Jeremiah  7iii.  3 ;  xxiii. 
3,  8  :  xxix.  14,  18,  «te.,  disjiuiit,  disjecil,  Jer.  xxiii.  2  ;  1.  17,  but  also  ahduxit,  Deut.  xiii.  6, 11,  seduxil,  Deut.  xiii.  14  ;  2  Chron. 


CHAP.  11.  13,  14. 


87 


xxi.  11 ;  Prov.  vii.  21.  [Owen  :  "  There  seems  to  be  a  mistake  in  this  word  of  a  T  for  a  1,  two  letters  very  similar  ;  for  the 
Targ.  the  fiyr.  and  the  Arab.,  must  have  bo  read  the  word,  as  they  render  it  in  the  sense  of  what  is  deceptive,  fallacious,  or 
imaginary.  It  is  in  the  last  rendered  jihantasms.  The  word  occurs  in  .ler.  xxii.  14,  and  is  ajipliiid  to  chambers  through  which 
air  or  wind  passed  freely.  It  may  be  rendered  here  winds  or  airy  things.  Such  was  the  character  of  their  prophecies. 
This  is  far  more  suitable  to  the  passage  than  expulsions  or  rejections,  as  given  by  the  Sept.  and  Vulff."     As  the  verb  HIJ 

Bometimes,  though  rarely,  has  the  sense  of  misleading,  seducing,  may  not  the  idea  of  fallacious  have  been  derived  from 
CnnO  ?     There  is  no  necessity,  however,  for  imposing  such  a  meaning  upon  it  here.— W.  II.  II.] 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

In  these  two  closely  connected  verses,  the  Poet 
expresses  tue  thought  that  the  true  prophets  can- 
not repair  the  injury  the  bad  prophets  have 
caused.  He  greatly  desires  to  comfort  Zion,  by 
way  of  prophetical  testimony  in  her  behalf,  and 
by  way  of  comparison  to  her  advantage  with 
other  sufferers.  But  it  is  impossible:  for  im- 
measurable and  irretrievable  injury  has  been 
done  by  the  false  testimony  of  her  prophets. 

Ver.  13  "What  thing  shall  I  take  to  wit- 
ness for  thee  ?  What  testifij  I  to  thee  ?  [  What 
can  I  testify  to  thee? — W.  H.  H.]  The  Poet  means 
prophetical  testimony  (see  TH^^T^,  testimony,  la. 
viii.  16),  and  that  in  the  sense  of  instruction, 
warning,  correction,  (see  Jer.  vi.  10),  not  in  the 
sense  of  comforting  by  promises.  See  below, 
next  clause  of  this  verse,  on  the  words  that  I  may 
comfort  thee.  [While  the  word  signifies  propheti- 
cal testimony,  to  bear  witness  in  behalf  of  God, 
it  may  signify  divine  testimony  either  for  or 
against  a  person,  and  here  the  former  is  intimated 
both  by  the  construction  (see  critical  note  below), 
and  by  the  following  words  that  I  may  comfort 
thee.  Besides  the  Prophet  was  actually  testifying 
against  the  people  in  the  name  and  by  the  Spirit 
of  God.  But  He  received  no  favorable  message 
in  their  behalf.  There  is  an  allusion  to  ver.  9, 
"  her  prophets  also  find  no  vision  from  Jehovah." 
— W.  H.  H.]  What  thing  shall  I  liken  to 
thee — What  liken  to  thee, — O  thou  daughter 
of  Jerusalem?  What  shall  I  equal  to 
thee — what  compare  to  thee, — that  I  may  com- 
fort thee,  O  virgin  daughter  of  Zion?  It 
is  a  comfort  for  the  unfortunate  to  know  that 
others  have  endured  equal  suffering.  This  com- 
fort cannot  be  given  to  Zion.  The  idea  of  com- 
forting can  be  referred  to  all  three  of  the  pre- 
ceding verbs,  although  to  testify  T^H,  never 
means  prophesying  in  order  to  comfort  and  make 
happy,  but  has  always  the  sense  of  warning,  cor- 
rection: yet  even  warning,  correction  and  in- 
struction may  be  a  comfort.  [Where  this 
Hebrew  verb  occurs  in  the  sense  of  waining  or 
protest  it  is  always  connected  with  its  object  by  the 

significant  preposition  3  or  1^.  Here  the  word 
may  be  taken  simply  in  the  sense  of  bearing  wit- 
ness, in  which  sense  it  is  favorably  used  (even  in 
Hiphil)  iu  Job  xxix.  11,  see  also  Mai.  ii.  14.  The 
meaning  is,  What  can  I,  as  a  prophet  of  God  ami 
in  the  name  of  God,  testify  for  God  in  thy  behalf, 
in  order  to  comfort  thee?  Wouusworth:  "Wiiat 
prophetic  testimony  shall  I  utter  in  God's  name, 
in  order  to  console  tbee  ?  1  liave  no  message  of 
comfort  for  thee;  and  thy  misery  is  so  great,  that 
I  can  find  no  likeness  or  parallel  to  it,  wherewith 
to  assuage  thy  sorrow." — W.  H.  H.] — For  thy 
breach  is  great  like  the  aeB.—for  great  as  the 
tea  is  thy  rum,  or  injury ;  who  can  heal  thee  't 


That  is  to  say,  Zion's  hurt  is  immeasurable, 
and  incurable.  [Blayney:  "The  breach  ot 
wound,  which  Jerusalem  had  received,  is  by  an 
hyperbole  said  to  be  great,  deep  or  wide,  like  the 
sea,  which  is,  as  it  were,  a  breach  made  in  the 
earth."  Hknuerson:  "He  cannot  find  any  ob- 
ject to  put  iu  parallel  with  the  lamentable  con- 
dition of  Jerusalem.  The  only  exception  is  the 
sea,  which,  on  account  of  its  vast  dimensions, 
alone  furnished  a  fit  emblem  of  the  magnitude  of 
the  devastation  effected  by  the  Chaldeans." 
AssEM.  Ann.  ;  "  Such  a  breach,  as  not  some  small 
river,  but  the  sea  is  wont  to  make,  when  it  hath 
rent  asunder  and  got  thorow  the  sea-walls,  that 
before  kept  it  out;  such  as  cannot  be  made  up 
again.  See  Jer.  li.  42;  Ez.  xxvi.  3;  Job  xxx. 
14."  Calmet:  Un  ocean  de  maux,  un  deluge  dt 
douleurs,  une  mer  d' affliction,  A  sea  of  miseries,  a 
flood  of  troubles,  an  ocean  of  sorrow.] 

Ver.  14.  Thy  prophets  have  seen  vain 
and  foolish  things  for  thee.  Thy  prophets 
foretold  to  thee  deceit  and  white-wash.  [Thy  pro- 
phets prophesied  to  thee  falsehood  and  delusion.   The 

last  word  (73^)  has  been  variously  translated, 
though  Naegelsbach  alone  can  claim  the  unique 
and  parabolical  idea  expressed  by  white-wash. 
This  meaning  is  suggested  by  the  use  of  the  word 
in  £z.  xiii.  10-15;  xxii.  28,  rendered  in  our  ver- 
sion untempered  mortar.  Whether  Ezekiel  meant 
white-wash,  or  not,  which  is  doubtful,  the  word 
can  have  no  such  meaning  here.  To  daub  a  wall 
with  white-wash  is  feasible.  To  prophesy  white- 
wash is  impossible.  The  Hebrew  word  (/SO) 
seems  to  have  suggested  the  idea  of  something 
viscous,  sticky,  slimy;  hence  applied  to  lime,  mor- 
tar, as  by  Ezekiel;  or  to  the  white  of  an  egg 
(Job  vi.  6),  from  which  comes  the  idea  of  insipi- 
dity, want  of  savor,  which  is  the  sense  adopted  in 
our  text  by  Broughton:  The  prophets  have  looked 
out  for  thee  things  vain  and  which  have  lost  the  salt- 
ness,  and  by  Calvin,  insulsitatum,  vel  insipidum, 
tastelessness  or  insipidity;  this  sense  easily  sug- 
gests (he  idea  of  folly,  in  which  sense  the  word 
in  our  text  is  rendered  by  most  of  the  versions; 
Sept.:  a(ppoavvT/v ;Yvlq.:  stulta;  LvTHER-.thorieh- 
te  Gesichte;  E.  V.:  foolish  things.  The  word  as 
thus  used  would  implj'  tnore  than  mere  absurdity, 
which  is  the  sense  lii.AYNEYand  Boothroyd  give 
it.  It  means  a  folly  that  is  chargeable  with  yuilt, 
in  which  sense  the  cognate  word  n^3n  is  used  in 
Job  i.  22  (see  Barnes'  Notes),  xxiv.  12:  a  folly 
especially  that  is  deceptive,  that  does  not  fulfil 
the  expectations  it  excites,  in  which  sense  the 

same  word  H/Sfl  is  applied  to  false  prophets  in 
Jer.  xxiii.  13. — We  have  not  in  English  a  word 
that  will  express  both  these  ideas, — delusive 
folly  or  foolish  delusions.  Gerlach  uses  the 
word  Blend-werk,  false-show,  delusion,  but  ac- 
knowledges that  it  expresses  only  the  effect,  and 
not  the  contemptible  character  of  what  the  pro- 


88 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


pliets  did.  The  word  stuf,  adopted  by  Hender- 
son, "thy  prophets  see  for  thee  vanity  and  stuff," 
is  hardly  equivalent  to  the  Hebrew  word.  He 
borrowed  it  from  Gataker,  who  says,  "They 
look  upon  them  to  be  seers,  but  saw  not  what 
they  should  see,  and  told  what  they  saw  not, 
nothing  but  vain  and  frivolous  stuff,  the  froth  of 
their  own  fancies,  Jer.  xxiii.  16.  '26;  xxvii.  14, 
15." — w.  H.  H.j  The  expression  NV^  DTn  \_mw 
vain  thiriffs ;  E.  V.,  prophesied  falsehood'],  is  found 
five  times  in  Ezpkiel  and  only  in  Ezekiel,  xiii.  6, 
7,  liS;  xxi.  3-4  [E.  V.  29],  xxii.  28.  The  expres- 
sion Ssn  [E.  v.,  here,  foolish  things,  in  Ezek., 
uiilempered  mortar],  is  also  Ezekiel's,  for  it  is  used 
by  him  emphatically  four  times,  in  the  same 
chapter  that  contains  the  phrase  (Nlt^  TiVn)  just 
referred  to,  xiii.  10,  11,  14,  15;  and  it  is  used 
ao-ain  by  him,  and  that,  too,  in  immediate  con- 
nection with  the  same  phrase  (Xli;/  <^^^)  in  xxii. 
28.  The  thirteenth  chapter  of  Ezokielis  directed 
against  the  false  prophets.  Ezekiel  in  that  de- 
nunciatory discourse  has  before  his  eyes  what 
Jeremiah  had  said  relative  to  the  same  subjoct 
(^^chap.  xxiii.).     Now  in  Jer.  xxiii.  13  occurs  the 

expression  H/Sn,  in  the  prophets  of  Samaria  I  saw 
riSan  TE.  v.,  folli/,  marg.,  an  unsavory,  or  an 
absurd  thing'].  73^  [the  word  in  our  text]  never 
occurs  in  Jeremiah.  Besides  here,  it  occurs  only 
in  Ezekiel  at  the  places  above  cited,  and  in  Job 
vi.  6.  For  its  meaning  see  the  thorough  discus- 
sion of  Haevernxck  in  his  Comm.  on  Ezekiel. 
The  whole  passage  in  which  Ezekiel  uses  the  ex- 
pression Ssn  in  the  sense  of  white-wash,  and  to 
which  xxii.  28  afterwards  refers,  bears  through- 
out the  peculiar  characteristics  of  Ezekiel's 
metaphorical  style.  We  cannot,  therefore,  doubt 
that  Ez.  xiii.  was  written  earlier  than  our  chap- 
ter: and  also  that  the  words  from  '^'Sl'^J  to  ipr\ 
originated  from  the  above  cited  places  of  Ezekiel. 
See  the  Introduction,  I  3.  [The  inference  con- 
tained in  the  Introduction  and  implied  here,  that 
if  this  is  a  quotation  from  Ezekiel,  Jeremiah 
could  not  be  the  author  of  the  Lamentations,  is  en- 
tirely gratuitous.  The  thirteeulh  chapter  of 
Ezekiel  must  have  been  written  before  the  final 
destruction  of  Jerusalem;  "about  five  years'' 
before  "Jerusalem  was  taken  and  destroyed," 
according  to  Wordsworth.  Even  if  the  prophecy 
of  Ezekiel  had  been  nearly  or  quite  contempora- 
neous with  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  it  is  a 
mere  assumption,  incapable  of  proof,  that  Jere- 
miah could  not  have  possessed  a  copy  of  that 
prophecy,  even  if  we  are  obliged  to  believe  that 
he  wrote  these  lamentations  immediately  after 
the  destruction  of  the  city.  With  the  close  inter- 
course that  must  have  subsisted  at  the  time  be- 
tween Babylonia  and  Palestine,  with  an  invading 
army  constantly  flowing  in  and  meeting  detach- 
ments guarding  captives  and  si)oil.s  going  out,  and 
with  the  lively  sympathy  tiuit  niu.-st  have  existed 
between  Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah,  and  between  the 
pious  Jews  in  exile  and  the  pious  Jews  in  Judea, 
it  would  be  neither  impossible  nor  unlikely  that 
the  utterances  of  those  prophets  should  be  inter- 
changed as   rapidly  as  they  were  committed  to 


writing. — In  point  of  fact,  however,  it  is  by  no 
means  clear  that  this  passage  is  a  quotation  from 
Ezekiel.  As  to  the  first  expression,  it  is  com- 
posed of  two  words  only,  both  in  frequent  use  in 
the  earlier  Scriptures  and  in  the  prophets  who 
preceded  Jeremiah.  And  as  to  the  second,  it  is 
useil  in  a  connection  entirely  dift'erent  from  that 
in  which  it  occurs  in  Ezekiel,  and  very  obviously 

in  a  different  sense.  How  prophesying  /DH 
could  be  suggested  by  daubing  a  wall  with  /3ri. 
it  is  difficult  to  see.  How  the  word  can  mean  the 
same  tiling  in  both  places,  is  also  beyond  the 
power  of  ordinary  perception.  There  would  be 
as  much  propriety  in  giving  the  word  the  mean- 
ing of  white-wash  or  mortar  in  Job  vi.  6  as  here. 
This  is  no  more  a  quotation  from  Ezekiel,  than 
Ezekiel's  use  of  the  word  is  a  quotation  fioiii  Job. 
— W.  H.  H.] — And  they  have  not  discovered 
thine  iniquity,  to  turn  aw^ay  thy  captivity 
— And  uncovered  not  thg  guilt,  to  turn  ihg  captivity 
[i.  e.,  to  prevent  it,  or  avert  it.  tio  the  Syr. 
translates  it.]  The  expression,  turn  thy  captivity, 
founded  on  Deut.  xxx.  3.  is  frequent  in  .Jeremiah 
(see  xxxii.  44;  xxxiii.  7,  etc.),  and  with  Ezekiel 
(xvi.  53;  xxix.  14,  etc.).  But  in  the  connection 
in  which  it  here  occurs,  it  does  not  mean,  as  it 
does  in  the  places  referred  to,  vertere  cnptivita- 
tein,  i.  e.,  reducere  captivos  [turn  the  captivity,  i.  e., 
bring  back  the  captives],  but  can  only  mean 
arerlere  capli"itate7n  [avert,  or  prevent  the  capti- 
vity]. By  open  exhortations  to  repentance,  the 
prophets  would  have  averted  the  captivity  (see 
Ez.  xxii.  30,  31).  The  words  arc  connected  with 
what  precedes.  [Assem.  Ann.:  "They  laid  not 
thy  sins  before  thee,  to  bring  thee  to  repentance, 
whereby  thy  present  miseries  might  have  been 
prevented,  Jer.  vi.  13,  14;  viii.  11 ;  xxiii.  17,  22." 
Gi:klach  and  others  understand  this  to  mean 
that,  after  the  captivity  was  a  fact,  the  prophets 
had  not  led  the  people  to  a  repentance  that  would 
have  delivered  them  from  it,  see  Ps.  xiv.  7  ;  Job 
xiii.  10  ;  Jer.  xxx.  18.  But  this  sense  would  not 
be  pertinent  here.  Our  text  looks  back  to  one 
of  the  origiiialcausesof  the  present  misery.  What 
her  prophets  might  have  done  to  prevent  it,  they 
cannot  now  do,  even  if  by  doing  it  they  could 
terminate  that  misery  ;  for  now  her  prophets  can 
fnd  no  vision  from  Jehovah,  ver.  9.  If  they  had 
exercised  their  power  aright  when  they  possessed 
it,  the  captivity  would  have  been  averted.  This 
is  the  idea  now  in  the  Poet's  mind. — AV.  11.  II.] — 
But  have  seen  for  thee  false  burdens  and 
causes  of  banishment — And  they  foretold  to 
thee  sayings  of  deceit  and  of  seduction.  ^But  then 
they  saw  for  thee  burdens  of  falsehood  and  expulsions. 
— W.  II.  H.]  The  connecting  thought  is.  And  so 
prophesied  they,  etc. — False  burdens — oracles  of 
deceit,  Kit!/  ntX^D,  are  declarations  of  delusory 
purport,  which  result  not  felicitously,  but  ruin- 
ously.— Causes  of  banishment,  seductions, 
D'n-np,  can  signify,  ambiguously  indeed,  either 
seductions  or  banishments.  Both  predicates  may 
refer  to  the  discourses  of  the  false  prophets.  Lu- 
ther makes  the  last  feature  only  conspicuous. 
"But  they  have  preached  to  thee  wantonly,  in 
that  they  have  preached  thee  out  of  the  land." 
TiiENnis  rightly  draws  attention  to  the  fact  that 
Jeremiah,   xxvii.  10,  15,  in  a  passage  where  he 


CHAP.  II.   13,  14. 


8<> 


warns  of  the  false  prophets,  expresses  emphati- 
cally and  exactly  the  same  thought  which  is  con- 
tained in  our  verse,  "Hearken  not  ye  to  your 
prophets  *  *  *  for  they  prophesy  a  lie  unto  you, 
to  remove  you  far  from  your  land;  and  that  I 
should  drive  you  out  (D3nX  "'^'^HIT'l.  comp.  ver. 
15,  DDnX  ""nnn  J^oS),  andyeshouldperish."  It 
is  therefore  very  possible  that  the  Poet,  by  the 
choice  of  this  word,  seemingly  invented  ad  hoc  for 
his  present  purpose,  would  give  us  to  understand 
that  he  had  in  view  not  only  the  declarations  of 
Ezekiel,  but  also  those  of  Jeremiah  pertaining  to 
this  matter.  Thus  the  verb  niJ  [from  which  the 
Hebrew  noun  is  derived]  is,  as  seen  from  the  ex- 
amples adduced,  especially  current  with  Jere- 
miah. It  is  found  in  this  prophet  nineteen  times, 
elsewhere  in  the  old  Testament  thirty-four  times, 
ten  of  which  are  in  Deuteronomy.  But  that  it 
may  be  used  here  ambiguously,  its  connection 
with  )f.yd  indicates.  [There  are  three  objections 
to  the  translation  of  Naegelsbach.  1.  It  makes 
the  last  clause  of  the  verse  a  mere  repetition  of 
the  first  clause.  2.  It  is  very  doubtful  if  the  last 
word,  rendered  seduction  (Notes,  seductions),  can 
have  that  meaning.  Wordsworth  gives  its  lite- 
ral meaning  as  drivings  away,  and  explains  it 
consistently  with  the  general  idea  adopted  by  our 
author,  "the  prophecies  of  thy  false  prophets,  to 
which  thou  didst  hearken,  instead  of  listening  to 
God,  have  banished  thee,  and  driven  thee  away 
from  thy  home."  3.  The  word  rendered  by  Nae- 
gelsbach, Wordsworth,  Notes  and  others,  pro- 
phecies, and  in  E.  V.  burdens,  cannot  mean  any 
prophecy,  without  reference  to  its  subject  or 
character,  but  designates  a  prophecy  of  a  threat- 
ening or  minatory  nature.  The  correct  transla- 
tion then  is.  But  they  saw  for  thee  burdens  of  va- 
nity and  expulsions  or  banishments.  But  how  could 
this  be  true  of  the  false  prophets  ?  Hengsten- 
BERG  (on  Zech.  i.  9)  understands  the  vain  burdens 
and  exiles  or  dispersions,  which  the  false  prophets 
predicted  as  referring  to  the  enemy.  "  The  false 
prophets  endeavor  to  make  themselves  beloved 
by  the  people,  by  predicting  a  great  calamity, 
which  should  come  upon  their  powerful  oppres- 
sors." (Soalso  DiODATi.)  The  objection  to  this 
is  that  it  does  not  naturally  follow  the  second 
clause  of  the  verse,  and  is,  after  all,  only  a  repe- 
tition of  the  first  clause.  Henderson  takes  the 
word  burdens  as  meaning  the  causes  of  punishments, 
as  our  version  has  rendered  the  last  word  causes 
of  banishment.  "The  false  prophets,  in  their  at- 
tempts to  account  for  the  captivity,  invented  any 
one  but  the  true  one, — the  apostacy  of  the  Jews." 
This  preserves  the  logical  connection  between 
the  three  clauses  of  the  verse,  but  is  philologi- 
eally  untenable,  for  the  idea  of  causes  of  punish- 
ment is  not  suggested  by  the  words  used.  The 
probable  explanation  is  suggested  by  the  use  of 
the  future  with  )  conversive,  which,  while  it 
makes  the  verb  a  preterite,  suggests  a  time  pos- 
terior to  that  to  which  the  preceding  preterites 
referred.  Her  prophets  having  predicted  vain 
and  foolish  things,  and  failed  to  bring  the  people 
to  repentance,  and  so  save  them  from  captivity, 
then  at  last,  after  the  captivity  occurred,  them- 
selves predicted  for  her  burdens  of  misfortune 
and  of  banishments.     Those  very  prophets  who 


once  prophesied  so  many  things  full  of  flattery, 
overwhelmed  and  panic-stricken  in  the  hour  of 
calamity,  see  nothing  but  evil  for  the  daughter 
of  Zion,  and  were  loudest  in  their  predictions  of 
punishments  and  misfortunes.  This  would  agree 
with  the  interpretation  already  given  to  the 
words  in  ver.  9.  Her  prophets  also  find  no  vision 
from  Jehovah,  i.  e.,  no  vision  of  good,  of  blessing, 
they  have  only  visions  of  evils,  prophetical  bur- 
dens full  of  apprehensions  and  fears.  Another 
explanation  suggests  itself  from  the  double  mean- 
ing of  the  verb  to  see,  nin,  which  may  mean 
merely  to  see,  or  to  see  by  prophetical  inspiration. 
It  may  be  taken  in  the  former  sense,  with  a  sa- 
tirical purpose.  These  prophets  did  see  propheti- 
cally, or  pretended  to  do  so,  visions  from  God 
that  were  vain  and  delusory,  but  they  afterwards 
actually  saw  in  course  of  fulfilment  the  burdens 
of  misfortune  and  banishment  pronounced  by  Jere- 
miah and  formerly  derided  by  them.  The  use  of 
the  word  t^lt^,  if  it  necessarily  means  false 
(though  it  may  possibly  mean  simply  misfortune, 
see  Job  vii.  3;  Is.  xxx.  28;  Hos.  xii.  12),  would 
be  a  valid  objection  to  the  last  interpretation,  but 
not  to  the  other,  for  in  that  case  the  burdens  were 
false  burdens,  suggested  by  their  own  excited  and 
terrified  imaginations.  The  force  of  the  future 
with  1  conversive,  following  verbs  in  the  prete- 
rite, may  be  expressed  here  thus,  but  then,  i.  «., 
after  the  captivity,  they  saw  false  burdens  and  ex- 
pulsions.— W.  H.  H.] 

The  thought  is  entirely  Jeremiac.  See  ii.  8 ; 
xiv.  13-15;  xxvii.  14-16,  etc.  In  Lamentations 
it  occurs  only  once  again,  iv.  13. — [^JJS'O.  After 
all  that  has  been  asserted  to  the  contrary,  the 
evidence  from  its  derivation  and  use  is,  that  this 
word  means  simply  a  burden,  and,  as  applied  to 
prophecies,  an  announcement  of  punishment  or 
vengeance  imposed  on  its  object  as  a  burden. 
The  verb  t^t^J  never  means  to  pronounce,  except 

T  T 

in  a  figurative  sense,  as  if  the  voice  were  lifted 
up  in  loud  outcries  or  shouting:  and  its  deriva- 
tive niS'p  is  not  used  in  a  single  instance  where 
it  can  only  mean  a  simple  declaration  or  an- 
nouncement, or  where  we  cannot  trace  at  least  a 
figurative  allusion  to  something  that  is  borne  or 
carried  as  a  burden.  It  is  used  twenty-four 
times  of  a  literal  material  burden  (Num.  iv.  15, 
19,  24,  27  twice,  81,  32,  47,  49;  2  Kings  v.  17; 
viii.  9;  2  Chron.  xvii.  11;  xx.  25;  xxxv.  3;  Neh. 
xiii.  15,  19;  Is.  xxii.  25;  xxx.  6;  xlvi.  1.  2; 
Jer.  xvii.  21,  22,  24,  27) ;  ten  times  of  a  literal 
mental  burden  or  care  (Num.  xi.  11,  17  ;  Deut. 
i.  12  ;  2  Sam.  xv.  33;  xix.  36;  2  Kings  ix.  25; 
2  Chron.  xxiv.  27  ;  Job  vii.  20;  Ps.  xxxviii.  6; 
Ez.  xxiv.  25) ;  twice  where  it  seems  to  refer  to 
usury  laid  as  a  burden  on  the  unfortunate  (Neh. 
V.  7,  10),  once  for  punishment  as  a  burden  (Hos. 
viii.  10),  twenty-four  times  with  reference  to  pro- 
phecies that  may  fairly  be  regarded  as  of  a  mina- 
tory character,  laying  burdens  on  their  objects 
(Is.  xiii.  1 ;  xiv.  28;  xv.  1;  xvii.  1 ;  xix.  1 ;  ixi. 
1,  11,  13;  xxii.  1  ;  xxiii.  1  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  33  twice, 
34,  36  twice,  38  thrice;  Ezek.  xii.  10;  Nah.  i.  1, 
Hab.  i.  1;  Zech.  ix.  1;  xii.  1;  Mai.  i.  1),  three 
times  where  it  is  translated  by  E.  V.  song,  and  in 
the  margin  carriage,  where  the  idea  of  the  care 
of  religious  services  involves  the  idea  of  a  burdtn 


90 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


(1  Chron.  xv.  22  twice,  27),  and  twice  where  it 
may  mean  a  solemn  charge  laid  as  a  burden  on 
those  to  whom  it  is  given  (Prov.  xxx.  1 ;  xxxi. 
1)  A  careful  examination  of  these  passages, 
the  only  ones  except  our  text  where  the  word  oc- 


curs, will  strongly  confirm  the  oj  .nion  that 
ntS'D  never  means  simply  effalum,  a  declaration, 
an  ordinary  oracle  or  prophecy,  but  always  one 
implying  a  burden  of  evil  foretold  or  imprecated 
— W.  H.  H.] 


II.  15,  16. 


15  All  that  pass  by  clap  their  hands  at  thee ;  they  hiss  and  wag  their  head  at  thf^ 
daughter  of  Jerusalem,  saying.  Is  this  the  city  that  men  call  The  perfection  ot 

16  beauty,  The  joy  of  the  whole  earth?  All  thine  enemies  have  opened  their  mouth 
against  thee :  they  hiss  and  gnash  the  teeth :  they  say,  We  have  swallowed  her  up ; 
certainly  this  is  the  day  that  we  looked  for ;  we  have  found,  we  have  seen  it. 

TEXTUAL   AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  15.— '■IJI    ilpiJD      Num.xxiv.lO;  Jobxxvii.23.     See  Jer.  xxxi.l9  (Ez.  xxi.  17) ;  xlviii.  26.— Jer.  nowhere  uses  tha 
I    :  |t' 
expression  tyXI    plt^-    He  says  instead  E^X'^S   T'Jil,  xviii.  16,  comp.  Ps.  xliv.  15.— The  t^,  relaiivum,  which  is  used 

here,  and  in  ver.  16,  evidently  because  words  from  the  common  colloquial  dialect  are  quoted,  occurs  in  Lam.  only  in  these 
two  verses  and  in  iv.  19 ;  v.  18,  and  not  at  all  in  Jer.  The  Prrm.  rel.  must  be  regarded  as  in  the  accusative  of  the  nearer  re- 
lation (in  reference  to  whom  they  said  it,  see  my  Gr.,  g70,  e.f.),  since  10X  never  directly  means  to  call  (see  Is.  v.  2U;  viii. 

12 ;  Eccles.  ii.  2).    The  Imperfect  here  indicates  repetition  in  past  times ;  see  on  ^lOX',  ver.  12.— rr)''^2-    This  word-form 

and  its  variations  are  frequent  in  Ezekiel  (see  xvi.  14 ;  xxiii.  12 ;  xxxviii.  4 ;  xxvii.  24) ;  Jeremiah  never  uses  them.    See 

Ps.  1.  2,  '£3^    SSdO  is  mentioned  as  going  out  of  Zion.— Jeremiah  (xlix.  25)  and  Ezekiel  (xxiv.  25)  use  tyityD  by  itself,  each 

-   .    .  T 

only  once. 

Ver.  IG.— With  reference  to  the  transposition  of  the  initial  letters  ^  and  £)  in  chaps,  ii.,  iii.,  iv.,  see  the  Intr. — Jeremiah 
never  uses  nif 3  :  in  Ez.  it  is  found  once,  ii.  8.— ^pltJ?.     See  ver.  15.— The  verb  p"in  occurs  only  in  Job  xvi.  & ;  Ps.  xxxvii. 

TT  I    :  It  '    "■^  L 

12 :  XXXV.  16  ;  cxii.  10,  and  is  used  only  of  grinding  the  teeth,  gnashing  with  the  teeth.— ^J^13,  vers.  2, 5,  8.— Jer.  often  uses 

the  Piel  H^p,  viii.  15  (xiv.  19);  xiii.  16;  xiv.  22:  it  is  not  found  in  Ezekiel. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

In  these  verses  the  Poet  depicts  the  scornful 
triumph  of  heathen  and  inimical  nations  over 
the  ruin  of  Jerusalem.  [Scott:  "  The  idolaters 
took  the  words  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Jews,  and 
derided  them  for  glorying  in  their  holy  city  and 
its  peculiar  protection  and  privileges.  The  com- 
bination of  scorn,  enmity,  rage  and  exultation, 
which  the  conquerors  and  spectators  manifested, 
when  gratified  by  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  temple,  are  set  before  the  reader  with 
peculiar  pathos  and  energy.  The  whole  scene 
is-  presented  to  his  view  as  in  some  exquisitely 
finished  historical  painting:  and  the  insulting 
multitudes,  who  surrounded  the  Redeemer'is 
cross,  can  hardly  be  forgotten  on  the  occa- 
fiion."] 

Ver.  15.  All  that  pass  by  clap  their  hands 
at  thee;  they  hiss  and  v/ag  their  head — They 
clap  their  hands  over  thee  all  who  pass  by  the  way. 
They  hiss  and  shake  their  head.  \_All  that  passed 
by  the  way  clapped  their  hands  at  thee,  they  hissed 
and  wagged  their  head.  Owen:  "Jeremiah  re- 
lates what  had  taken  place,  the  verbs  being  in 
the  past  tense.  Our  version  is  not  correct  in 
rendering  the  verbs  in  the  present  tense.  The 
old  versions  follow  the  Hebrew." — W.  H.  H.] 
Some  (Otto,  Thknius)  interpret  this  verse  as 
the  expression,  not  of  mockery,  but  of  amaze- 
ment. They  say  not  all  who  passed  by  would 
have  mocked.     That  may  be.     But  the  number 


who  would  not  was  certainly  decreasingly  small. 

For  by  the  '^^"1  '"^.•?i*'  passers  of  the  way,  we  must 
understand  travellers  and  strangers.  The  Is- 
raelites were  no  longer  in  that  empty  land,  and 
if  there  were  some,  yet  to  them  the  destruction 
of  the  city  w.is  only  too  well  known.  But  clap- 
ping the  hands  is  a  gesture  especially  of  sur- 
prise. Besides,  it  is  further  said,  that  they  hiss. 
The  Hebrew  verb  V"]^  signifies,  it  is  true,  pri- 
marily to  whistle,  and  does  not  always  express 
^<coiu    and    mockery    (see    Is.    v.    26 ;     vii.   18). 

[p^U  with  S,  Is.  V.  26;  vii.  18;  Zech.  x.  8,  does 

It:' 

not  express  scorn  and  mockery,  but  with  /]l  it 
always  does,  1  Kings  ix.  8;  Job  xxvii.  23;  Jer. 
xix.  8;  xlix.  17  ;  1.  13  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  36  ;  Zeph.  ii. 
15.  We  whistle  to  a  person  to  call  his  attention, 
but  to  whistle  at  or  over  a  person  implies  deri- 
sion.— W.  H.  H.]  But  the  connection  here  de- 
cidedly favors  the  sense  of  'scornful  hissing.' 
For  p'^B',  to  hiss,  must  be  taken  in  the  same  sense 
in  which  it  is  immediately  used  in  the  next  verse, 
which  is  closely  connected  with  this  verse.  There 
it  undoubtedly  has  this  sense.  Add  to  this,  that 
the  shaking  of  the  head  is  always  an  expression 
of  scornful  wonderment;  Ps.  xxii.  8;  cix.  25; 
Job  xvi.  4;  Is.  xxxvii.  22  (2  Kings  xix.  21). — • 
At  the  daughter  of  Jerusalem.  See  ver.  13. 
[Mark  the  distinction  between  thee  in  the  first 
clause,  and  the  daughter  of  Jertisalem  in  the  second 
clause.     In  the  first  chapter  the  city  itself  is  pro- 


CHAP.  II.   17. 


91 


minent  and  foremost,  and  Zion  appears  as  an 
accessory  to  her  past  grandeur,  once  her  crown- 
ing glory,  but  now  in  ruins,  the  cause  of  her 
deepest  disgrace  and  anguish.  In  this  chapter 
the  relations  of  the  two  are  reversed.  Zion 
here  stands  forth  in  ideal  personification  as  the 
conspicuous  figui-e,  and  the  city,  the  daughter  of 
Jerusalem,  once  her  chief  honor  and  her  joy,  is 
now  the  chiefest  cause  of  her  shame  and  grief. — 
W.  H.  H.] — Saying,  Is  this  the  city  that 
men  call — h  that  the  city  of  which  it  used  to  be 
said. — The  perfection  of  beauty — Perfect  in 
beauty.  The  expression  is  borrowed  from  Ezekiel, 
xxvii.  3,  where  the  prophet  so  calls  the  city  of 
Tyre,  and  xxviii.  12,  where  he  indicates  the  king 
of  Tyre  as  "perfect  in  beauty." — The  joy  of 
the  w^hole  earth.  This  expression  is  used  of 
Zion  in  Ps.  xlviii.  3.  [Alexander:  "It  is  called 
the  joy  of  the  whole  earth,  as  a  source  of  spiri- 
tual blessing  to  all  nations."]  See  Is.  xxiv.  11. 
Jerusalem  is  called  the  joy  of  the  whole  earth, 
and  not  merely  of  the  whole  land  [«'.  e.,  the  land 
of  Israel  (Owen)],  as  is  evident,  because  that 
which  is  perfect  in  beauty  must  be  all  this,  and 
because  all  the  strangers  and  travellers  passing 
by  it  are  represented  as  moved  at  first  with  asto- 
nishment. Joy  at  her  beauty  can  be  reconciled 
with  envy  and  hatred  of  her  inhabitants. 

Ver.  16.  This  verse  enters  into  very  close 
connection  with  the  preceding  one.  It  treats  of 
the  same  malicious  rejoicings  of  the  enemies  over 
the  downfall  of  Jerusalem.  But  it  proceeds  far- 
ther in  its  statements,  for  while  in  ver.  15  only 
the  passers-by,  in  ver.  16  all  her  enemies  are  rep- 
resented as  rejoicing  and  exulting. — All  thine 
enemies  opened  their  mouth  against  thee. 


All  thine  enemies  gape  their  mduth  at  thee  [lit.,  AH 
of  thy  enemies  opened  at  thee  wide  their  mouth']. 
The  gaping,  or  distorting  of  the  mouth,  in  be- 
hoof of  scornful  laughter,  is  indicated  again  in 
iii.  46.  where  these  words  are  almost  verbally 
repeated,  and  with  the  expressions  here  used  in 
Ps.  xxii.  14.— They  hiss  [lit.,  they  hissed]  see 
ver.  15 — and  gnash  [lit.,  ynashed]  the  teeth. 
As  this  is  elsewhere  an  expression  of  suppressed 
rage,  so  here  it  is  an  expression  of  satisfied  rage. 
See  Ps.  xxxv.  16,  21,  25.— They  say  [lit.,s«?rf], 
we  have  swallow^ed  her  up — we  have  de- 
voured \_i.  e.,  completely  destroyed].  Not  only 
those  enemies  who  had  personally  taken  an  active 
part  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  are  in- 
tended, but  all  had  a  share  in  what  some  actually 
achieved, — so  far,  at  least,  that  all  could  say, 
"  We  have  destroyed." — Certainly  this  is  the 
day  that  •we  looked  ior—Yea.  /his  is  the  day 
we  have  expected.  It  is  evident  that  the  restriction 
involves  an  assertion ;  if  only  this  day  (as  the  day 
of  total  destruction),  and  no  other,  could  afford 
satisfaction  to  the  enemies,  then  certainly  that 
day  afforded  satisfaction  in  the  highest  degree. 
See  Jer.  x.  19. — ^"We  have  found,  'wre  have 
seen  it. — Finding,  IJXi'O,  is  the  antithesis  to 
seeking,  striving.  Seeing,  UN"!,  which  involve» 
the  idea  of  certainty  on  the  ground  of  seeing  with 
the  bodily  eyes  (see  Ps.  iv.  7  ;  Ixxxv.  8),  is  the 
antithesis  to  merely  wishing  and  hoping.  The 
heaping  together  of  words  arranged  asyndetically 
[tve  have  looked  for,  we  have  found,  we  have  seen, — 
the  original  can  hardly  fail  to  remind  us  of  the 
famous  Veni,  vidi,  vici]  portrays  the  intensity 
and  the  completeness  of  their  satisfaction. 


II.   17. 


17  The  Lord  hath  clone  that  which  he  had  devised ;  he  hath  fulfilled  his  word  that 
he  had  commanded  in  the  days  of  old :  he  hath  thrown  down,  and  hath  not  pitied : 
and  he  hath  caused  thine  enemy  to  rejoice  over  thee :  he  hath  set  up  the  horn  of 
thine  adversaries. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  17.— DDT  Itl'X  HK?^-  See  Deut.  xix.  19.— The  verb  jrX3,  in  Jer.  only  in  Kal  and  in  the  connection  j;V3  J^VI^, 
t1.  13;  viii.  10.  In  the  sense  oi  absolvere,  filling  up,  it  is  found  Is.  x.  12;  Zech.  iv.  9. — n^ON  is  found  no  where  else  in  th« 
Old  Testament.  The  form  H^OX,  once  very  frequent,  especially  in  Ps.  cxix.,  is  found  neither  in  Jer.  nor  Ez. — Piel  ni3f 
Jer.  uses  very  frequently.— Dip  'D'D,  seei.  7.— Piel  n3ti',  twice  in  Jer.;  in  Lam.only  here.- pp  D''in-  This  expres- 
sion is  not  found  in  Jer.;  he  only  once  uses  the  word  \'^T>,  see  on  ver.  3. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  17.  [In  ver.  17  the  direct  address  to  Zion 
is  resumed,  and  is  continued  through  vers.  18, 
19.— W.  H.  H.]  The  ruin  of  Zion,  as  above  de- 
scribed, was  not  a  fortuitous  event.  God  had 
for  a  long  time  foreseen  and  decreed  it  as  eventu- 
ally inevitable.  Hence  the  historical  catastrophe 
is  nothing  else  than  a  realization  of  a  divine 
purpose.  It  was,  then,  God  Himself  who  de- 
stroyed the  holy  city  and  afforded  to  her  enemies 
the  rejoicings  of  which  vers.  15,  16  speak.     To 


those  verses  this  verse  refers  throughout, — Ths 
Lord  hath  done  that  TArhich  he  had  devised 

Jehovah  accornplished  what  He  had  decreed.  See 
Jer.  li.  12,  "for  Jehovah  hath  both  devised  and 
done  that  which  He  spake."  Zech.  i.  6  expands 
the  same  thought  by  the  emphatic  expression  of 
the  middle  term,  "Like  as  Jehovah  of  hosts 
thought  to  do  unto  us,  according  to  our  ways,  and 
according  to  our  doings,  so  hath  He  dealt  with  us.'" 
[Henderson:  "However  the  enemies  of  the 
Jews  might  tauntingly  exult  in  their  destruction 
of  the  Jewish  metropolis,  that  disastrous  oveni 
was  ultimately  to  be  referred  to  the  purpose  of 


92 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Jehovah  to  punish  its  inhabitants  for  their  sins  "] 
— He  hath  fulfilled  his  word  that  he  had 
commanded  in  the  days  of  old.  The  Lord 
had,  in  very  ancient  times,  when  He  founded  the 
Theocracy,  commanded  His  servants  to  warn  His 
people  that  in  case  of  disobedience  they  would 
have  to  suflFer  the  punishment  of  destruction. 
See  Lev.  xxvi.  14-39;  Deut.  xxviii.  15-68. 
[Scott:  "This  reference  to  the  ancient  predic- 
tions against  Israel  for  their  sins,  is  of  great  im- 
portance ;  both  as  it  shows  that  these  prophecies 
were  then  extant  and  well  known  among  the 
Jews,  and  that  they  were  understood  by  the  pious 
remnant  exactly  as  we  now  explain  them." — 
Blayney,  followed  by  Boothroyd,  divides  the 
verse  thus :  Jehovah  hath  accomplished  that  which 
he  had  devised ;  he  hath  fuljiUed  his  ivord;  tvhat  he 
constituted  in  days  of  old,  he  hath  destroyed  and  not 
spared;  and  says,  "To  this  construction  we  are 
determined  by  the  metre.     The  sense  is  good. 


and  perfectly  adapted  to  the  place,  and  corre' 
spends  nearly  with  what  is  expressed  Jer.  xliv. 
4."  All  this  is  true.  But,  on  the  whole,  the 
Hebrew  accents  rather  favor  the  common  divi- 
sion, the  metre  does  not  demand  the  change,  and 
the  repetition  of  the  pronoun  ^K?X  directly  befor* 
its  governing  verb  has  a  poetical  and  rhythmical 
etfect,  according  to  the  common  division,  not  to 
be  overlooked. — W.  U.  H.] — He  hath  thrown 
down — He  demolished,  or  destroyed. — And  hath 
not  pitied — And  pitied  not.  See^ver.  2. — And 
he  hath  caused  thine  enemy  to  rejoice  over 
thee — He  made  the  enemy  joyful  over  thee.  [Cal- 
vin :  exhilarated  their  enemies.^ — He  hath  set  up 
the  horn  of  thine  adversaries — He  exalted  the 
horn  of  thine  oppressors.  This  expression  is 
purely  poetical.  See  in  particular  1  Sam.  ii. 
10;  Ps.  Ixxv.  11;  xcii.  11 ;  cxlviii.  14;  1  Ghron. 
XXV.  6. 


II.   18,  19. 


18  Their  heart  cried  unto  the  Lord,  O  wall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion,  let  tears  run 
down  like  a  river  day  and  night :  give  thyself  no  rest ;  let  not  the  apple  of  thine 

19  eye  cease.  Arise,  cry  out  in  the  night ;  in  the  beginning  of  the  watches  pour  out 
thine  heart  like  water  before  the  face  of  the  Lord  ;  lift  up  thy  hands  toward  him 
for  the  life  of  thy  young  children,  that  faint  for  hunger  in  the  top  of  every  street. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  18.— noiri-     BoERMAL  would   altogether   erase    this   word.     Hodbigant    reads:    "-if    r\3    r*7^n3~^X    'JHX. 

Uerder:  ni^n  [or  JlOn],  i. e.,  exardesce  [fervido  zelo  corripere.    So  Blayney:   Their  heart  cried  out,  before  Jehovah  with 

fervency,  O,  etc.].    Dathe,  after  the  Syriac :  i':;    r\3    m'Din    'j'nX-SN-    J.  D.  Michaelis:    ''JIX  for  'jnX,  »■  e.,  rfajna* 

cor  eorum  oh  fundamenta  murorum.     Tufilia  Zion  descendere  fac,  etc.    Thenius  would  read  D^n  instead  of  flDiri-     Ewaid, 

in  his  later  editions,  reads  IjsS   'p^V-    He  compares  Ps.  Ixxii.  2,  and  translates,  indefatigahly  cry  to  Jehovah,  O  wall  of  the 

daughter  of  Zionl    The  reading  r\Oin>  however,  is  confirmed  by  the  Sept.    Tor  this  translates,  'E^oijae  Kap&ia  avriof  npo^ 

Kvptof.-  Tcivr)  Siiuv  (taTayaYCTe  <os  x^'/"-<^PP'"'*  SaKpva,etc.  JEROME  does  not  change  the  text,  but  he  translates,  Clamavit  cor 
eorum  ad  Duminum,  iuper  muros  Jilix  Ziwi.— The  verb  J-13  in  the  sense  torpidum,  laiiguidutii  esse,  Niph.  examinatwii,  ener- 

vaium  esse  Gen.  xlv.  26;  Hah.  i.  4;  Ps.  lxxvii.3;  xxxviii.  9.    The  substantive  PIJ^B  occurs  only  here:  njISn  "i-  49.    The 

'  T  T       -: 

construction  ^7    ]M>i2  is  a  very  strong,  perhaps  the  strongest,  example  of  the  use  of  the  construct  case  for  the  mere  pur- 

poae  of  the  external  connection  of  words.    See  Ew.,  2287,  d,  2;  289,  h     DD1  is  used  here  in  the  general  sense  of  cessare. 

8«e  Josh.  X.  12,  13;  Jer.  xlvii.  6.  .„,  ._„  .„LL         „  -L 

Ver.  19.— 'D^p.   See  Jer.  ii.  27;  xiii.  4,  6;  xviii.  2.— ""Jl.    See  Jer.  xxxi.  7;  Prov.  i.  20.— ^'^J.     See  i.  2.— E?X^7 

nnOC'N,  an  expression  only  found  here.— 'Jj]  HDJ-  See  Jer.  xvii.  16.— ['"jnx.  Hendeeson  :  "  Instead  of  uldonaf  forty  of 

Kennicott's,  and  forty-eight  of  De  Rossi's  MSS.,  together  with  seven  more  of  his  originally,  and  the  Hagiographa  printed 
at  Naples,  read  Jehuvah.  The  Venetian  Greek  version  has  tov  octwtoO.  On  these  authorities  I  have  not  scrupUHl  to  follow 
this  reading  in  the  tianslation."      Blaynby,  BOOIHEOYD,  Noies,  adopt  this  reading.— W.  H.  H.j— ':j''33  ''Xty.  not  in  Jere- 


EXEQETICAf,  AND  CRITICAL. 

Ver.  18.  Their  heart  cried  unto  the  Lord. 

— The  first  words  of  ver.  18  have  given  the  com- 
mentators great  trouble.  Various  readings  have 
been  invented.  I  believe  that  neither  a  different 
reading,  nor  an  artful  construction  is  necessary. 
Only  we  must  not  regard  the  words,  neir  hearts 
cried  unto  the  Lord,  as  an  independent  sentence 
(LcECKENBUBSSER,  THENitis)  thrown  in  by  the 
way.  Rather,  these  words  constitute  the  intro- 
duction and  means  of  transition  to  all  that  fol- 


lows down  to  the  end  of  the  chapter.  First  of 
all,  let  it  be  observed,  from  the  second  clause  of 
ver.  18,  the  Poet  lets  Zion  herself  speak  with 
reference  to  what  he  had  been  saying  in  vers. 
13-17.  This  change  in  the  method  of  recital  he 
precedes  with  the  brief  word  of  introduction 
above  indicated.  But  what  he  now  puts  into  the 
mouth  of  Zion,  as  an  outpouring  of  the  heart  to 
Jehovah,  he  divides  into  two  parts.  First  of  all, 
in  vers.  18  b,  19,  they  to  whom  the  pronoun  their 

(the  suffix  in  037,  their  heart)  refers  address  the 
wall  and  summon  it  to  prayer.     In  vers.  20-22 


CHAP.  II.   18,   19. 


93 


the  prayer  itself  follows,  which  accordingly  must 
be  regarded  as  the  prayer  of  the  wall  of  Zion. 
They  of  whom  it  is  said,  Their  heart  cries  unto  the 
Lord,  are  evidently  particular  individuals.  But 
these  persons  would  not  appear  before  God  in 
their  individual  capacities,  but  rather  seek  the 
mediation  (der  idealen  Gesammtheit)  of  the  whole 
church,  regarded  in  its  ideal  or  mystical  unity. 
Thus  the  cry  of  their  heart  comes  to  God  through 
the  mouth  (der  Gesammtheit)  of  the  united  peo- 
ple [theocratically  and  by  personification  re- 
garded as  a  unit].  Thus  it  is  explained  why  the 
words,  Their  heart  cried  unto  the  Lord,  are  not  im- 
mediately followed  by  words  addressed  to  God, 
but  by  an  appeal  to  the  wall  of  Zion,  which  by 
answering  this  appeal  brings  before  the  Lord  that 
which  filled  their  heart,  as  mentioned  in  ver.  18 
a.  That  those  individuals  should  thus  seek  the 
mediation  of  the  whole  church  (Gesammtheit)  is 
very  natural.  For  not  the  individual  Israelite, 
but  Israel  is  the  universally  historic  reservoir 
and  organ  of  the  redeeming  grace  of  God.  With 
Israel  is  the  covenant  of  grace  made,  and  only  as 
covenant  members  of  Israel  have  individuals  any 
claim  on  covenant  grace.  Now,  therefore,  as  in 
the  Psalms  (cxxxv.  19;  cxlvii.  12;  cxlix.  1-3, 
etc.)  the  congregation  is  often  summoned  to  oifer 
praise  and  thanks  to  the  Lord,  so  here  it  is  sum- 
moned to  make  its  complaint  to  the  Lord.  If 
this  is  done  here  in  a  very  peculiar  fashion,  by 
summoning  to  prayer  the  wall  of  Zion  as  if  it 
were  the  symbol  of  the  theocratic  unity  (der 
Gesammtheit),  yet  this  is  justified  by  the  his- 
torical circumstances  out  of  which  our  Song 
originated.  Zion  stood  as  long  as  the  walls  held 
togetlier.  But  as  soon  as  these  were  broken 
through,  Zion  was  lost  (see  Jer.  lii.  7,  "^^H  J^P^i^] 
then  the  city  was  broken  up).  Is  it  surprising  iliat 
an  Israelite,  who  had  experienced  the  siege  and 
capture  of  Jerusalem,  should  take  the  wall  for 
all  that  it  enclosed  ?  This  trope  is,  on  the  whole, 
no  more  bold,  than  where  elsewhere  the  frontiers 
are  taken  for  the  country  they  bound,  the  house 
for  its  inhabitants,  the  purse  for  its  contents. 
The  pre-eminent  importance  of  the  wall  may  be 
clearly  perceived  from  thei'act  that  in  Nehemiah's 
time  everything  depended  on  its  restoration.  See 
Neh.  vi.  15,  1(3;  xii.  :i7-43;  comp.  Ps.  cxxii.  3. 
If  the  wall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion  is  thus  taken 
for  the  daughter  of  Zion  herself,  it  should  not 
surprise  us  that  the  same  activities  are  attributed 
to  the  wall  which  belong  properly  to  the  daughter 
of  Zion,  and  that  it  is  exhoited  to  weep  and  to 
pray  lor  its  children.  Mourning  and  exhaustion 
have  already  been  attributed  to  it  in  ver.  8  above, 
and  in  i.  4  the  ways  of  Zion  are  represented  as 
mourning.  Further,  Is.  iii.  2G  and  xiv.  31  have 
been  correctly  referred  to,  where  the  predicates 
of  mourning,  lamenting  and  howling  are  imputed 
to  the  gates.  [The  first  words  of  the  verse  must 
refer  to  the  enemies  who  are  the  subject  of  the 
preceding  verse.  There  is  no  other  nominative 
expressed  to  which  the  pronoun   their  (the  suttix 

in  037)  can  belong.  To  refer  it  back  to  the 
passer-by  in  ver.  15,  as  Blayney  does,  is  unneces- 
sary and  unnatural.  To  suppose  that  it  reiers 
to  the  pious  Jews  is  to  suppose  an  abrupt  un- 
gramnialicai,  and  awkward  transition,  to  which 
there  is  no  parallel  in  the  Lamentations.     The 


pronominal  suiExes  in  these  Songs  are  employed 
with  singular  accuracy.  If  we  keep  in  mind  the 
proper  meaning  of  the  verb  rendered  cried,  which 
is  to  cry  out,  to  vociferate  (Deut.  xxii.  24,  27;  Is. 
xlii.  2),  we  readily  see  the  connection.  Even 
these  heathen  enemies  recognized  the  hand  of 
God  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  thei) 
heart  expressed  this  conviction  in  loud  outcries 
and  shouts  addressed  to  the  Ijord, — Adonai  the 
Lord  of  the  heathen,  as  well  as  of  Israel.  This 
may  throw  additional  light  on  the  words  in  ver. 
7,  "They  have  made  a  noise  in  the  house  of  Je- 
hovah, as  in  the  day  of  a  solemn  feast."  (It  is  not 
impossible  that  the  choice  of  a  proper  initial 
word  may  have  led  to  this  continued  reference 
to  the  heathen.)  After  the  word  Lord  there 
ought  to  be  a  full  stop.  This  is  indicated  in  the 
Hebrew  by  the  accent  Aathnah,  which  rarely 
occurs  so  near  the  beginning  of  a  verse.  What 
follows  is  not  what  the  enemies  cried,  nor  indeed 
can  it  be,  for  the  Hebrew  word  so  translated  is 
intransitive.  Whenever  that  word,  p^2f  is  fol- 
lowed by  anything  spoken  or  said,  the  verb  ^DXi 
to  say,  is  introduced,  Ex.  v.  8,  they  cry,  saying:  15, 
xvii.  4;  Num.  xii.  13;  2  Kings  iv.  1;  vi.  26, 
cried — saying:  1  Kings  xx.  39;  2  Kings  iv.  40; 
vi.  5,  cried — and  said.  The  only  seeming  ex- 
ception to  this  construction,  2  Kings  ii.  12,  where 
I'^lisha  cried,  My  father,  my  father!  etc.,  is  due, 
probably,  to  the  broken  disconnected  ejacula- 
tions of  the  prophet,  that  could  hardly  be  pre- 
ceded by  the  verb  "^DX,  as  if  he  had  said  some- 
thing with  deliberation.  It  must  be  observed, 
too,  that  they  were  only  ejaculations,  outcries, 
that  he  uttered,  and  the  verb  is  not  followed  by 

7X  as  it  is  here.  But  here,  where  7X  is  used,  a. 
long  and  connected  address,  like  this  to  the  walls 
of  Zion,  could  not  be  the  object  of  the  verb  pi'^i 
to  cry.  Had  the  prophet  intended  to  tell  us  what 
the  enemies  said  to  God,  he  would  have  followed 
the  word  pj^2^,  they  cried  with  the  usual  phrase 
and  said.  We  must  take  therefore  the  following 
touching  address  to  the  walls,  as  the  words  of 
the  Prophet.  We  thus  avoid  the  exceeding 
awkwardness  of  introducing  a  long  address  to 
the  walls  of  the  city  with  the  singular  announce- 
ment that  they  cried  to  the  Lord,  when  there  is 
not,  according  to  Naegelsbacii,  a  single  word 
actually  addressed  to  the  Lord,  for  the  prayer  in 
verses  20-22  is  the  prayer  of  Zion.  We  moreover 
dispense  with  the  necessity  of  the  laliorious  dis- 
tinction between  the  individual  meiubeis  of  the 
church  and  the  mystical  unity  of  the  untransla- 
table Gesammtheit.  We  have  here  an  eloquent 
poetical  address  by  the  prophet  to  the  ruined 
walls,  which  by  personification  and  synecdoche 
represent  the  afflicted  daughter  of  Zion. — Words- 
worth: "0  tvall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion.  The 
Prophet  appeals  to  the  luall  of  Jerusaleoi,  as  that 
which  once  encircled  her  with  defence,  but  now 
lies  prostrate,  and  which,  being  reduced  to  ruin, 
was  the  fittest  representative  of  the  city  in  her 
desolate  condition.  He  gives  a  voice  to  the  stones 
of  the  wall,  and  makes  them  weep  for  her  sor 
row.  We  need  not  be  surprised  by  such  a  pro- 
sopopoeia as  this,  any  more  than  by  his  exclama- 
tion, 0  earth,  earth,  earth  (xxii.  29),  or  by  ^h". 
language  of  Hab.  ii.  11:   The  stone  shall  cr>j   uul 


94 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


of  the  wall,  and  the  beam  shall  answer  it;  or  by  our 
Lord's  words  (Luke  xix.  40),  If  these  should  hold 
their  peace,  the  stones  would  cry  out.'''  Comp.  Ger- 
LACH,  p.  75.— W.  H.  H.]— Let  tears  run  down 
like  a  river  day  and  night.  The  expression, 
precisely  as  it  is  here,  is  found  no  where  else. 
For  similar  expressions,  see  iii.  48;  Jer.  ix.  17; 
xiii.  17;  xiv.  17.— Give  thyself  no  rest;  let 
not  the  apple  of  thine  eye  cease  [or  leave 
of,  i.  e.,  shedding  tears  (Noyes)].  The  daughter 
of  thine  eye.  This  expression  is  found  elsewhere 
only  in  "Ps.  xvii.  8.  r\3,  daughter,  is  here  ap- 
parently an  abbreviation  of  ^33,  entrance,  door, 
gate.  Zech.  ii.  12.  The  pupil  is  the  door,  the 
opening  of  the  eye,  because  in  it  lies  the  power 
of  sight.  See  Fuerst  Lex.,  Gesen.  Thes.,Y>.  841. 
Delitzsch  on  Ps  xvii.  8.  [Assem.  Ann.:  "That 
•which  we  call  the  ball,  or  apple  of  the  eye,  from 
the  spherical  figure  of  it,  that  the  Hebrews  call 
the  daughter  of  the  eye,  either  as  the  dearest  aud 
tenderest  part  of  it,  Deut.  xxxii.  10;  Prov.  vii. 
2,  or  from  the  figures  that  seem  to  appear  in  it, 
whence  also  it  is  termed  by  the  Greeks  the  damsel, 
by  the  Latins  the  babe  of  the  eye."  See  Deut. 
xxxii.  10;  Prov.  vii.  2,  and  Alexander  ou  Ps. 
xvii.  8.  Blayney  understands  the  tear  as  so 
called  "with  great  propriety  and  elegance;" 
but  this  is  supported  by  no  evidence,  and  is  ren- 
dered improbable  by  analogous  terms  applied 
to  the  pupil  of  the  eye,  by  Hebrews,  Greeks  and 
Romans,  as  indicated  above. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  19.  Arise,  Rise  ?//?.— [Gerlacu:  "Up." 
Owen:  "The  meaning  as  stated  by  Gataker,  is, 
Sise  from  thy  bed;  for  she  is  exhorted  to  cry 
in  the  night.  The  Hebrevv  word  is  familiar  and 
precious  to  us  as  the  same  our  Saviour  uttered, 
Mark  v.  41.  "  Talitha  cumi,"  kovui,  'Dip. — W. 
H.  H.]— Cry  out  in  the  night,  in,  or  at  the 
beginning  of  the  watches.  The  Hebrews 
divided  the  night  into  three  watches  ["the  fiist, 
commencing  at  sunset  and  extending  to  what 
corresponded  to  our  ten  o'clock;  the  second, 
from  ten  till  two  in  the  morning;  and  the 
third  from  that  time  till  sun  rise  "  (  Henderson  )] : 

the  middle  one  was  called  nyO'Pn  n'^OK'^n,  the 

middle  ivatch.  Judges  vii.  19;  the  last  n^btJ^X 
•1p3n,  morning  watch,  Ex.  xiv.  24;  1  Sam.  xi. 
11.  Since  in  Judges  vii.  19  the  beginning  of  the 
middle  watch  is  called  'PH  'X  tyN"l  [lit.,  head  of 
middle  watch'],  so  nnp'^^/N  tJ^KT  [lit.,  head  of  night 
u-<ilches\,  the  beginning  of  the  night  watches  gene- 
rally, would  be  the  time  of  the  tirst  watch.  See 
Winer,  R.  W.  B.,  s.  v.,  Nachtwachen.  [The 
opinion  that  this  was  the  name  of  \\i(i  first  watch, 
eeems  to  rest  entirely  on  its  use  here.  Yet  there 
is  much  reason  to  doubt  if  it  has  here  that  sense. 
To  rise  in  the  first  watch  of  the  night,  wiiich  be- 
gan before  ordinary  bed-time,  is  not  very  sug- 
gestive of  sleepless  grief  and  anxiety.  The  pas- 
sage in  Judges  favors  Gerlacii's  conjecture,  that 
the  expression  denotes  the  beginning  of  each  suc- 
cessive watch  in  the  night.  He  refers  to  the  simi- 
lar use  of  ti'NI,  head,  beginning,  in  this  same 
verse,  and  quotes  the  remark  of  Michaelis,  that 
niXm  E^XT  means,  not  the  first  of  all  the  open- 
places,  but  the  beginning  or  head  of  every  one  of 


them.  So  nnP'i'X  ^KT  means  not  the  first  of  th» 
night  watches,  but  the  beginning  of  each  succes- 
sively. At  every  watch,  or  as  often  as  you  hear 
the  watchman  announce  the  hour,  cry  out  to  God 
in   prayer. — W     H    H.]      The  preposition  used 

here  in  Hebrew,  ;,  means  toivards  or  about  that 
time  (see  Gen.  iii.  8;  viii.  11).  The  sense  is, 
About  the  time,  when  formerly  every  one  re- 
signed himself  to  hi.*  first  sleep,  the  one  here 
addressed  should  rise  up  to  painful  mourning. — 
Pour  out  thine  heart  like  w^ater.  This 
seems  to  denote,  first  of  all,  the  melting,  dissolving 
of  the  heart  by  grief  (see  Ps.  xxii.  15;  Iviii.  8; 
comp.  1  Sam.  vii.  6),  and  then,  the  open  unre- 
served outpouring  of  the  heart  (see  Ps.  Ixii.  9; 
xlii.  5;  cii.  1). — Before  the  face  of  the  Lord 
[Jehovah,  see  Textual  note  above]. — Lift  up  thy 
hands  toward  him.  Lift  up  to  him  thy  hands. 
.•>ee  Ps.  Ixiii.  5;  cxix.  48.  [Calvin:  "The  ele- 
vation of  the  hands,  in  this  place  and  others, 
means  the  same  thing  as  prayer;  and  it  has  been 
usual  in  all  ages  to  raise  up  the  hands  to  Heaven, 
and  the  expression  often  occurs  in  the  Psalms 
(xxviii.  2;  cxxxiv.  2);  aud  when  Paul  bids 
pi'ayers  to  be  made  every  where,  he  says,  '  I 
would  have  men  to  raise  up  pure  hands  without 
contention'  (1  Tim.  ii.  8)."] — For  the  life  of 
thy  young  children,  lit., /or  the  souls  of,  etc. 
As  is  seen  by  the  words  following  [that  have 
fainted,  etc.),  the  object  of  holding  up  the  hands 
is,  not  to  save  the  children  (Rosenmueller),  but 
to  mourn  over  their  loss.  See  at  vers.  11,  12. 
Besides,  the  children  are  designated,  also,  as  in 
the  verses  just  named,  not  as  the  only,  but  as  a 
principal  object  of  lamentation.  See  vers.  20- 
22.  [Gerlach:  "To  raise  the  hands  is,  ac- 
cording to  the  fixed  use  of  words,  the  same  thing 
as  to  pray,  iii.  41 ;  Ps.  xxviii.  2  ;  Ixiii.  5  ;  cxxxiv. 
2  (see  1  Tim.  ii.  8),  and  therefore  cannot  be 
understood,  with  Thenids,  as  a  gesture  of 
the  deepest  distress.  If  he  would  confirm 
this  opinion  by  the  fact,  that  according  to  the 
whole  train  of  thought  their  fate  is  already  de- 
termined and  can  only  be  mourned  over,  and 
therefore  an  exhortation  to  pray  for  the  life  of 
the  languishing  ones  would  no  longer  be  in 
place ;  then  we  answer,  that  in  that  case  no 
prayer  in  behalf  of  the  city  would  any  longer  be 
proper,  for  its  fate  was  fulfilled  ;  yet  it  would  be 
proper  for  those  who  are  found  surviving  in  great 
want,  as  in  fact  a  prayer  immediately  follows  on 
the  thought  of  this  calamity  in  i.  11,  20:  See,  Je- 
hovah,   how    I    am    distressed.       And,     further, 

Uay'l^  [for  the  soul]  does  not  indicate  the  al- 
ready ended  life  (Thenius,  De  Wette),  for  which 
l^Di  (the  life  principle)  would  be  a  singular  ex- 
pre.ssion ,  and,  further  still,  it  would  be  in- 
consistent with  the  descriptions  given  in  ver.  11 
and  iv.  4,  5,  where  not  the  death  of  those  who 
ii.-ive  fainted,  but  the  distress  of  those  still  living, 
rends  the  hearts  of  their  mothers."     Gerlach  s 

opinion  is  confirmed  by  the  words  to  Him,  V7X. 
'wy  up  thy  haiuh  to  him,  i.  e.,  to  God  in  prayer. — 

v.  H.  H.]— That  faint  for  hunger  in  the  top 
[lit.,  at  the  head]   of   every  street — Wli<>  have 

fainted  for  hunger  al  the  opening  of  every  street. 
See  iv.  1 ;     Is.  Ii.  20 ;    Nab.  iii.  10.       That   the 


CHAP.  II.  20-22. 


wall,  in  the  poet's  conception,  strictly  and  only 
represents  Zion,  is  plainly  evident  from  this,  that 
the  Israelitish  childi-en  are  designated  as  the 
children  of  the  wall.  This  could  be  done  with 
the  more  propriety  from  the  fact  that  the  wall 
had  a  certain  motherly  character.  Did  it  not 
embrace  the  people  with  its  arms  ?     Did  it  not 


truly,  in  a  certain  mother-like  manner,  bear  them 
on  its  bosom?  [Wordsworth:  "The  wall, 
which  girdled  Jerusalem,  is  regarded  as  a  mo. 
ther,  which  nurses  the  inhabitants,  her  offspring, 
in  her  bosom ;  and  she  laments  for  the  children 
which  lie  at  the  end  of  the  streets,  extending 
from  one  side  of  the  city  to  the  other."] 


II.  20-22. 

20  Behold,  O  Lord,  and  consider  to  whom  thou  hast  done  this.  Shall  the  women 
eat  their  fruit  and  children  of  a  span  long?    shall  the  priest  and  the  prophet  be 

21  slain  in  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord  ?  The  young  and  the  old  lie  on  the  ground  in 
the  streets :  my  virgins  and  my  young  men  are  fallen  by  the  sword :  thou  hast  slain 

22  them  in  the  day  of  thy  anger ;  thou  hast  killed  and  not  pitied.  Thou  hast  called, 
as  in  a  solemn  day,  my  terrors  round  about ;  so  that  in  the  day  of  the  Lord's 
anger  none  escaped  nor  remained  :  those  that  I  have  swaddled  and  brought  up  hath 
mine  enemy  consumed. 

TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  20. — 771J7.  See  i.  12;  lii.  25. — [OX.  Henderson  :  "  □$<  is  twice  used  in  this  verse  with  the  force  of  a  demon- 
strative interjection."  He  translates,  Behnld!  women  eat  their  fruit,  infants  of  a  span  long ;  Behold!  priest  and  prophet  are 
slain,  etc.     This  is  manifestly  wrong.     In  the  very  few  instances  in  which  DX  has  the  force  of  an  interjection,  it  retains  a 

conditional  sense,  and  never  introduces  an  unqualified  affirmation,  or  statement  of  an  unquestioned  matter  of  fact  (see  Hos. 
xii.  12;  Job  xvii.  13,  16;  Prov.  iii.  SI;  Jer.  xxxi.  20).     Besides,  the  future  form  of  the  verbs  requires  here  a  conditional  or 

potential  sense.— W.  H.H.] — J'^H-    Seeii.4.    [Henderson:  "The  nominative  to  JTrT  is  tflD  and  XO J  taken  singly."    The 

-T  -T  ••  I  ••  •  T 

German  enables  Naegelsbach  to  preserve  the  Hebrew  construction,  Soil  erwUrget  werden  Priester  und  Prophet  ? — W.  II.  U.] 
— iy";"3"D.    See  ii.  7. 

Ver.  21. — -130  J!/.   Jeremiah  uses  2D^  only  once,  ni332/J  iii-  25 ;  but  we  find  K'ri  (decidedly  arbitrary)  in  iii.  2,  r\23\!^- — 
I  :   T  .  -  T  T  :    :    •  :   :  ~  "-. 

ylX/-     See  vers.  2,  10,  11.— ni^flP.     Aoc.  loc.     See  my  Gr.,  J  70,  a,  j3.     ["The  accusative  is  used  after  verbs  of  rest,  in  an- 

I     V  T  T 

swer  to  the  question  iu/i«re.'"  Naegels.  (?r.]—?pn    ^_J/J.     See  Jer.  li.  22.— jin3£0-     See  Jer.  xi.  19 ;  xxv.  34 ;  li.  40.     The 

•xpression  seems  to  involve  an  antithesis  to  D'HStO.  ver.  20. 

Ver.  22. — X'^pj^.    The  imperfect,  when  compared  with  the  preceding  and  following  perfects,  seems  to  be  due  entirely 

to  the  necessities  of  the  acrostic.  [Perhaps,  the  future  lu're,  as  in  ver.  20,  has  a  conditional  or  potential  sense.  So  Owen, 
who  connects  it  with  the  words.  See,  O  Jehova)i,  and  consider.     In  this  case  the  )  following  would  have  the  sense  of  for  ;  or 

as  in  E.  V.:  so  that.  Shoiddsl  TItou  call  together,  as  on  a  festival,  all  my  terrors  from  round  about!  For  there  was  not,  etc. 
Blaynev,  in  his  emendation  of  the  text,  overlooks  the  necessity  of  a  p\  initial.— lj,»i;3  UVD-  See  ver.  6.— W.  H.  H.]— 
■"jT^T.  Piel  not  in  Jeremiah,  nor  does  he  use  the  verb  in  this  sense.  See  Ezek.  xix.  2. — U13-  See  Jer.  v.  3 ;  ix.  15  ;  xiv. 
IJ  ;  xlix.  C7,  etc.  [Blaynet  (lollowed  by  Boothroyd)  takes  this  word  for  73  with  suffix,  and  translates  :  Those  whom  I  had 
fostered  and  made  to  grow  were  all  of  them  my  enemies.  The  pointing,  012  uot  alD,  the  Versions,  and  the  sense,  are  all 
against  this.— W.  H.  H.] 

thou  hast  done  this.  [As  the  pronoun  is  in- 
terrogative, that  form  should  be  preserved:  to 
whom  hast  Thou  done  thus?  The  question  thus 
interposed  between  the  appeal  to  God  to  look, 
and  the  description  of  what  He  will  see  if  He 
look,  is  very  forcible  and  does  not  mar  the  sense 
as  the  ordinary  construction  does,  but  makes  it 
more  apparent. — W.  H.  H.]  The  Lord  had  done 
this,  not  to  a  heathen  nation,  but  to  the  people 
of  His  own  choice,  to  whom  all  the  promises  of 
His  blessing  were  given  (comp.  Gen.  xii.  2,  3; 
XV.  5;  xviii.  18;  xx.  17,  18;  xxvi.  3,  4;  xxviii. 
14,  etc.). — ShaU  the  -women  eat  their  fruit 
and  children  of  a  span  long  ? — Should  wo- 
men eat  their  fruit,  the  children  whom  they  nursed? 
This  is  a  single  indirect  question,  although  it  is 
contained  in  two  members.  DX,  if  [literally 
translated,  the  question  is,  if — shall  eat  women 
their  fruit,  etc.']  is  dependent  on  ^X^,  see  [see  y* 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

The  opinion  of  Chr.  B.  Michaelis  (which  Ro- 
SENMUELLEK  Seems  to  adopt),  that  the  following 
prayer  is  set  forth  by  the  prophet  himself,  as  a 
form  of  prayer  (imtar  formularis),  in  behalf  of 
the  daughter  of  Zion,  who  is  exhorted  to  pray  in 
vers.  18,  19,  hardly  needs  refutation.  That  the 
wall  of  Zion,  /.  e.,  Zion  herself,  utters  the  prayer 
in  vers.  20-22,  is  evident,  both  from  the  exhorta- 
tion to  prayer  in  vers.  18,  19,  and  from  the  sub- 
stantial agreement  of  vers.  20-22  with  what  vers. 
18,  19  had  indicated  as  the  subject  matter  of  this 
prayer  of  lamentation. 

Ver.  20.  Behold,  O  LORD,  and  consider 
— See,  0  Jehovah,  and  look.  This  exact  formula 
occurs  i.  11.  The  prayer  in  i.  20-22  (comp.  i. 
9)  also  begins  with  See,  Jehovah. — To  V7hom 


96 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


this  is  so,  or  should  be  so].  The  sense  of  the 
question,  moreover,  is  not,  whether  it  had  ever 
been  heard  of  that  mothers  had  been  driven  by 
hunger  to  eat  their  own  offspring?  (Rosenmuel- 
ler),  for  then  the  perfect  tense  ought  to  have 
been  used.  But  what  is  asked  is,  whether  that 
thing,  speaking  in  a  general  way,  may  be  sup- 
posable,  possible,  or  right;  and  to  express  this 
the  imperfect  must  be  used.  The  explanation  of 
Thenius,  "  Had  they  then  been  obliged  to  eat, 
etc.,  i.  e.,  Had  Thy  judgments  gone  so  far,  that, 
etc.,"  is  not  sufficiently  grammatical.  What  is 
asked  is,  whether  this  thing,  generally  speaking, 
would  be  allowed  to  happen?  The  answer  to 
this  question  would  involve  another,  whether  it 
had  been  suffered  to  happen  at  that  time  ?  But 
the  latter  question  is  not  directly  contained  in 
the  words  used. — The  crime  here  mentioned  is 
clearly  designated  as  a  punishment  to  the  rebel- 
lious people;  Deut.  xxviii.  53;  Jer.  xix.  9.  See 
2  Kings  vi.  28,  29 ;  Lam.  iv.  10.— Shall  the 
priest^and  the  prophet  be  slain  in  the  sanc- 
tuary of  the  Lord — Should  priest  and  prophet  be 
duin,  etc.  [Assem.  Ann.:  "Should  God  endure 
to  see  His  own  house  polluted  with  the  blood  of 
His  own  priests  and  such  as  bore  the  name  at 
least  of  His  prophets."] 

D''"<iD,  their  fruit.  The  masculine  suffix  has  in- 
duced most  interpreters  unnecessarily  to  change 
the  reading.  [As  the  Sept.  has  Kapnbv  KoiAiaq 
avTuv,  and  Ohal.  and  Arab,  similar  readings,  it 
has  been  conjectured  that  the  original  text  was 
iP3  '"^p,  of  which  the  3  changed  into  D  is  all 
that  remains  in  the  present  text.  Blajney  sug- 
gests Drri  '"^S.  Owen  has  an  original  device  of 
his  own  to  meet  this  presumed  difficulty.  He 
says,  ''Fruit,  in  the  sense  of  offspring,  is  applied 
to  men  as  well  as  to  women.  We  may  take  the 
final  mem  in  D'tJ'J  as  a  pronoun,  their  wives;  the 
same  are  meant  as  in  verse  18,  their  voice  \_heart?'\, 
i.  e.,  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem.  Thus  the  con- 
struction will  be  quite  grammatical.  Should 
their  own  wives  eat  their  ojfspiinff.'"  That  would 
mean  their  wives  ate,  not  their  own,  but  their 
husbands'  children.  This  would  furnish  preach- 
ers with  a  text  against  polygamy,  or  the  cruelty 
of  step-mothers!  IIendekson  is  satisfied  with  a 
magisterial  appeal  to  euphony:  "The masculine 
suffix  is  adopted  instead  of  the  feminine,  to  agree 
in  form  with  D'i^J  preceding." — W.  H.  H.]  It  is 
not  even  necessary,  with  Chr.  B.  Michaelis,  to 
keep  in  mind  mothers  and  fathers..  The  mascu- 
line, as  the  more  comprehensive  and  higher  sex, 
includes  the  feminine  too.  See  my  Gr.,  §  60,  5; 
Jer.  ix.  19;  xliv.  19,  25;  Gen.  xxxi.  9;  Ex.  i. 
"1^  etc. — D'npp  occurs  only  here.  It  is  the  ab- 
stract of  the  verb  npD,  which  is  found  only  in 
ver.  22  below.  The  latter  (different  from  BQ^, 
Is.  xlviii.  13)  is  a  denominative  from  Hptp,  palma, 
the  hand-breadth,  palm  of  the  hand,  and  .seem- 
ingly ^'igmiiQS  palmis  yestare  (the  Latins  say  ulnis 
ijestarc).  KiMCiii,  Vitiiinga,  Kalkar  would  un- 
derstand the  expression  of  the  smoothing  of  the 
limbs,  as  of  the  swaddling  clot  lies  and  bands, 
with  the  palm  of  the  hand.  [With  E.  V.,  chil- 
dren of  a  span  long,  agree  Vulq.:  parvulos  ad  men- 
auram  palmm ;    Luther:   die  jUngsten  Kindleia 


einer  Spanne  lang  ;  Broughton  :  infants  that  map 
he  spanned,  and  Henderson  :  infants  of  a  span  long. 
The  idea  of  children  carried  in  the  hands  is 
adopted  by  Blayney:  children  of  palms,  i.e., 
"little  ones  dandled  on  the  hands;"  Rosen- 
mueller:  infantes  quos  suis  manibus  tractant; 
Gerlach  :  die  Kinder,  die  man  auf  Hdnden 
triigt ;  and  Noyes  :  children  borne  in  the  arms. 
The  marginal  reading  in  E.  V.,  children  swaddled 
with  their  hands,  is  thus  explained  in  Assem. 
Ann.:  "Because  the  verb  means  to  7nete  or  to 
stretch  out  aught  with  the  hand,  as  Is.  xlviii.  13. 
Hence  both  the  Chaldee  Paraphrast  and  the 
Rabbins  here  expound  it  the  children  ofswaddiings; 
the  children  whose  limbs  the  mothers  were  wont 
to  stretch  out  and  stroke,  as  if  they  were  me- 
ting or  measuring  them  with  their  hands,  to  fa- 
shion them  and  make  them  grow  straight  and 
proportionable  ;  and  to  the  same  purpose  also  to 
make  them  up  with  swathing  bands;  for  this 
word  ariseth  from  a  root  frequent  in  the  Tal- 
mudists,  for  a  wrapper  of  linen,  %vherewith  to 
wrap  up  aught ;  as  also,  for  a  veil,  or  apron,  or 
the  like,  in  Scripture,  Ruth  iii.  15;  Is.  iii.  22; 
and  this  interpretation  receiveth  further  strength 
from  what  followeth  here,  ver.  22."  Calvin 
translates  parvulos  educationis,  which  Owen 
translates,  iiifants  while  nursed,  the  children  of 
nursings,  or  nurturjngs  [educationum).  Booth- 
royd:  their  little  nurslings.  The  Sept.:  those  suck- 
ing the  breasts.  After  examining  these  various 
translations  and  interpretations,  it  is  obvious 
that  Naegelsbach  has  expressed  the  true  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  whatever  is  its  fundamental  pri- 
mitive idea, — the  children  whom  they  nursed, — 
taking  the  last  word  in  its  most  comprehensive 
sense.— W.  H   H.] 

Ver.  21.  The  young  and  the  old  lie  on 
the  ground  in  the  streets — Boy  and  old  man 
lie  on  the  ground  in  the  streets.  [So  Gerlach. 
Blayney,  Noyes:  The  boy  and  the  old  man.  Hen- 
derson :  Boys  and  old  men. — The  verb  is  prete- 
rite, and  ought  to  be  so  translated.  He  is  de- 
scribing what  was  then  past.  The  boy  and  the  old 
man  lay  on  the  ground.  Blayney  :  hnve  lien. — 
W.  H.  H.] — My  virgins  and  my  young  men. 
See  i.  4,  18;  ii.  10;  v.  11. — Are — have — fallen 
by  the  sword.  See  Jer.  xix.  7;  xx.  4; 
xxxix.  18.  [Blayney  imagines  the  metre  needs 
improving,  and  translates.  My  virgins  and  my 
young  men  are  fallen;  with  the  sword  hast  thou  slain 
them,  in  utter  disregard  of  the  accents,  besides 
the  necessity  of  supplying  a  pronoun  not  ex- 
pressed.—W.  H.  H.] — Thou  hast  slain  them 
in  the  day  of  thine  anger;  thou  hast  killed 
and  not  pitied — Thou  hast  killed  in  the  day  of  thy 
anger  (see  ver.  2) ;  hast  slain  and  not  pitied  (ver. 
2).  [The  asyndetical  construction,  as  in  ver. 
l(j,  is  vehement  and  forcible.  Thou  hast  killed, 
hast  slain,  hast  not  pitied.  To  supply  the  con- 
junction and  or  personal  pronoun  than  weakens 
tlie  sentence. — W.  II.  H.] 

Ver.  22.  Thou  hast  called — Thou  callest  to- 
gether— as  in  a  solemn  day — as  on  a  feast-day. 
See  ver.  (>. — My  terrors  round  about  [lit., 
from  round  about,  from  every  direction,  so  that 
they  were  surrounded  by  them.  So  Broughton. 
Calvin  :  "  Here  he  uses  a  most  appropriate  me- 
taphor, to  show  that  the  people  had  been  brought 
to  the  narrowest  straits;  for  he  says  that  terrors 


CHAP.  II.  20-22. 


97 


bad  on  every  side  surrounded  them,  as  when  a 
solemn  assembly  is  called.  They  sounded  the 
trumpets  when  a  festival  was  at  hand,  that  all 
might  come  up  to  the  Temple.  As,  then,  many 
companies  were  wont  to  come  to  Jerusalem  on 
feast-days— for  when  the  trumpets  were  sounded 
all  were  called — so  the  Prophet  says  that  terrors 
had  been  sent  from  every  part  to  straiten  the 
miserable  people."  Owen  :  "J/y  terrors  mean  my 
terrifiers,  according  to  the  Vulg.,  the  abstract  for 
the  concrete.  "—W.  H.  H.] — So  that  in  the  day 
of  the  LORD'S  anger  none  escaped  or  re- 
mained—  And  there  was  not  on  the  day  of  Jehovah's 
wrath  an  escaped  one  or  a  survivor.  [The  two  words 
rendered  escaped  and  remained  seem  to  express  the 
same  idea ;  namely,  to  escape.  As  there  were 
multitudes  who  survived  the  slaughter  and  still 
remained  on  earth,  we  cannot  translate  the  second 
word  by  either  of  these  terms,  unless  we  regard 
them  as  merely  hyperbolical.  Probably  the 
meaning  is  that  none  entirely  escaped  the  eflfects 
of  God's  wrath,  and  we  may  translate  thus,  there 
was  not  one  that  escaped  or  was  exempt.  This  is 
consistent  with  the  meaning  of  the  verb  from 
which  the  noun  is  derived  (1^2^,  elabi,  to  escape, 
to  get  clear,  i.  e.,  of  condemnation  or  punishment), 
and  is  confirmed  apparently  by  Jer.  xlii.  17, 
"  they  shall  die  by  the  sword,  by  the  famine,  and 
by  the  pestilence :  and  none  of  them  shall  remain 
or  escape,"  i.  e.,  shall  escape  or  be  wholly  exempt 
(comp.  Jer.  xliv.  14), — "  from  the  evil  that  I  will 
bring  upon  them."  We  may  understand  the 
phrase  in  our  text  as  elliptical  for  the  fuller  ex- 
pression as  we  find  it  in  Jer.  xliv.  14,  remain  or 

escape  from  the  evils,  T\}}'\r\  'JSa  CD'Ss^l  T"tl^.  We 
may  translate  the  sentence  impersonally,  there 
was  not  that  escaped  or  was  exempt.  The  wrath  of 
the  Lord  descended  on  all  things  and  all  persons. 
The  city  and  Zion,  the  walls  and  the  gates,  the 
sanctuary,  palaces  and  houses,  and  all  the  inha- 
bitants, without  regard  to  age,  sex  or  condition, 
were  involved  in  a  common  ruin. — W.  H.  H.] 
— Those  that  I  have  swaddled — Those  I  have 
carried  or  nursed,  see  ver.  20 — and  brought  up, 
hath  mine  enemy  consumed — viy  enemy  de- 
stroyed them.  It  is  evident,  tliat  the  prayer  is  a 
prayer  of  lamentation,  and  with  respect  to  its 
object  responds  to  the  exhortation  contained  in 
ver.  19  by  giving  the  first  place  to  the  principal 
subject  of  that  verse,  without  restricting  itself  to 
that  subject,  which  is,  besides,  rather  intimated 
than  expressed. 

D'^Up,  terrors,  every  where  else  means  shelter, 
place  of  accommodation,  dwelling,  commoratio,  pere- 
grinatio  (Gen.  xvii.8;  xxviii.  4;  xxxvi.  7;  xxxvii. 
1;  Ex.  vi.  4,  etc.),  granary  (Sing.  "IIJO,  Ps.  Iv. 
16).  None  of  these  meanings  suits  here.  It  is 
better  therefore  to  derive  it  from  "^UD,  terrifying, 
which  occurs  frequently  in  Jeremiah,  vi.  25  ;  xx. 
3,4,10;  xlvi.  5;  xlix.  29.  [Gerlacu:  "This 
word  is  certainly  a  designation  of  the  enemy 
(Vulg.:  qui  terrent  me),  but  is  not  to  be  restricted 
to  them,  see  i.  20,  since  the  formula  so  frequent 
in  Jeremiah  (vi.  25  ;  xx.  4,  10;  xlvi.  5  ;  xlix.  29) 
is  a  general  expression  for  a  position  threatened 
on  all  sides  with  dangers  and  the  terror  pre- 
vailing therein." — EwALD,  according  to  Gerlach, 
takes  the  word  in  its  more  common  signification 


and  insists  that  it  relates  to  the  same  persons 
named  in  the  second  and  last  clauses  of  the  verse. 
"The  word  denotes  my  vdlagers  round  about,  and 
the  inhabitants  of  the  defenceless  country  towns 
and  villages  are  intended,  who  were  related  to 
the  chief  protecting  city  as  farmers,  C^-l  (Sept. 
■Kapomiai).  Thus  the  whole  verse  plainly  alludes 
to  a  great  event  in  the  days  of  the  siege.  All  the 
inhabitants  of  the  country  rushed  into  the  prin- 
cipal city  (as  happened  similarly  under  Titus) 
as  if  a  great  feast  as  of  old  were  to  be  held  in 
tills  city, — but  alas!  it  would  be  in  tlie  end  for 
them,  at  the  final  capture,  the  great  festivity  of 
murder."  This  makes  excellent  sense  of  the 
whole  verse,  and  is  recommended  by  preserving 
the  same  subject  throughout  the  three  clauses  of 
the  verse, — which  cannot  be  said  of  Blayney's 
translation.  Thou  hast  convoked,  as  on  a  set  day,  such 
as  were  strangers  to  me  round  about,  which  gives  us 
a  new  theme  in  each  clause.  But,  as  Gerlach 
remarks,  the  analogy  of  i.  15,  the  fact  that  the 
authority  of  the  Sept.  is  weakened  by  its  evident 
mistranslation  of  the  formula  in  the  prophetical 
book — fear  on  every  side,  and  the  diflSculty  of  sup- 
posing that  the  flight  of  the  country  people  to  the 
city  could  be  designated  as  a  summons  from  the 
Lord,  should  confirm  us  in  the  usual  translation 
of  this  passage. — W.  H.  H.] 

DOCTRINAL   AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  Ver.  1.  "Olim  erat  regnum  Israelitarum  in 
sublimi,  jam  sub  limo."  Forster. 

2.  Ver.  1.  "When  Jeremiah  says  throughout, 
the  Lord  has  done  it,  disregarding  what  Babel 
did,  he  would  teach  us,  when  injury  is  inflicted 
upon  us  by  the  world  and  men,  that  we  should 
regard,  not  the  instruments,  who  could  not  in- 
jure the  least  hair  of  our  heads,  but  God,  who 
does  and  ordains  it  (Lam.  iii.  37  ;  Am.  iii.  6;  Is. 
xlv.  7  ;  Sir.  xi.  14),  that  He  (1)  is  impelled  to  it 
by  our  sins,  and  (2)  that  He  prepares  His  pun- 
ishments in  Heaven,  before  they  are  inflicted  on 
transgressors.  This  serves  to  make  us  patient. 
Example:  Job  says  not,  The  Devil,  the  Chaldeans, 
the  Arabians,  did  this,  but  Goil'has  done  it.'- 
Cramer,  according  to  Eg.  Hunnius,  Scr.  I.,  ch. 
2,  p.  45. — [Ver.  1,  etc.  How  hath  Jehovah, 
etc.  "The  grief  is  not  so  much  that  such  and 
such  things  are  done,  as  that  God  has  done  them ; 
this,  this  is  their  wormwood  and  gall."  "To 
those  who  know  how  to  value  God's  favor,  no- 
thing appears  more  dreadful  than  His  anger; 
corrections  in  love  are  easily  borne,  but  rebukes 
in  wrath  wound  deep."  Matt.  Henry.] 

3.  Ver.  1.  "Bellarmine  is  not  wise  in  attempt- 
ing to  establish  the  worship  of  images  from  this 
text,  and  especially  from  Ps.  xcix.  5  (Lib.  II.,  de 
cultu  imagiiiuvi,  cap.  12).  For  the  Psalmist  would 
not  have  the  pious  worship  the  temple  of  the 
Lord,  or  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  or  mercy-seat. 
.  .  .  .  Therefore,  in  Hebrew  it  is  not  said,  Wor- 
ship His  footstool,  but  Worship  at  [or  ioivard]  Hif> 
footstool.  Augustine  understands  this  as  said 
with  reference  to  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  in 
which  the  Logos  is  adorned  with  Divine  worship 
{TiaTpeia).  But  this  interpretation  rather  strength- 
ens than  weakens  the  argument  of  the  Jesuit."' 
Forster. 

4.  Ver.  1.   "If  men  themselves  are  not  worthy, 


98 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


He  rejects  all  their  ceremonies.  He  inquires 
nothing  about  stone  houses  with  their  splendor, 
nothing  about  the  external  form  of  the  church, 
but  He  will  prepare  for  Himself  the  souls  of  in- 
dividuals in    the  fire  for   all  eternity."     Died- 

KICH. 

5.  Ver.  2.  "The  Abbot  Rupert,  in  his  com- 
mentary on  the  books  of  Kings  (B.  V.,  ch.  14) 
understands  the  fall  of  Jezebel  out  of  the  window 
(2  Kings  ix.  33), — as  well  as  the  passage  before 
us,  which  is  expressed  in  the  Vulgate  thus,  "the 
Lord  hath  cast  down  headlong  ...  all  that  was 
beautiful  in  Jacob," — as  a  prophecy  of  the  ven- 
geance which  Israel  has  incurred,  for  the  shed- 
ding of  the  blood  of  Christ ;  and  he  then  says, 
'  That  fall  has  been  heard  of  throughout  the 
whole  world.  Lo  !  that  synagogue  which  slew 
Christ,  where  is  it?  Truly,  whatever  seems  to 
remain  may  be  compared  to  what  the  dogs  left  of 
Jezebel's  body.'  "  Ghisleb.,p.  70. 

6.  Ver.  2.  "Paschasius  Radbertus  observes 
on  this  passage,  that  liingdom,  king,  priest.  Tem- 
ple, stronghold,  etc.,  may  be  nothing  else  than 
'as  it  were,  some  great  prophet  or  prophecy' 
contained  in  earthen  vessels.  'But  now  that 
Christ  has  come,  since  the  various  predictions 
concerning  Him,  which  were  contained  in  tliose 
vessels,  have  been  fulfilled,  they  have  all  been 
cast  down  and  broken,  destroyed  and  scattered, 
polluted  and  profaned,  that  all  the  mystical  and 
unutterable  secrets  which  were  concealed  in  them 
should  be  made  apparent  to  the  whole  world, 
being  revealed  more  clearly  than  light.'  "    Ghis- 

LER. 

7.  Ver.  2.  He  hath  polluted,  etc.  "  This  is, 
truly,  the  result  of  the  profanation  of  the  Divine 
name  and  majesty,  which  was  at  times  extremely 
common  even  among  tlie  chief  men  ;  and  this  re- 
sult is  in  accordance  with  the  rule  of  divine  jus- 
tice in  Wisdom  xi.  17 — Wherewithal  a  man  sin- 
neth,  by  the  same  also  shall  he  be  punished." 
FoESTER.  "The  secret  of  their  strength  was 
taken  away  from  the  people  in  the  persons  of 
their  princes,  as  Samson  lost  his  strength  when 
he  had  violated  his  vow."  Diedrich. — [Ver.  2. 
Prayer.  "Grant,  Almighty  God,  that  as  Thou 
settest  before  us  at  this  day  those  ancient  exam- 
ples by  whicli  we  perceive  with  what  heavy  pun- 
ishments Thou  didst  chastise  those  whom  Thou 
badst  adopted, — 0  grant,  that  we  may  learn  to 
regard  Thee,  and  carefully  to  examine  our  whole 
life,  and  duly  consider  how  indulgently  Thou  hast 
preserved  us  to  this  day,  so  that  we  may  ever  pa- 
tiently bear  Thy  chastisements,  and  with  a  hum- 
ble and  sincere  heart  flee  to  Thy  mercy,  until 
Thou  be  pleased  to  raise  up  Thy  Church  from 
that  miserable  state  in  which  it  now  lies,  and  so 
to  restore  it,  that  Thy  name  may,  through  Thine 
only-begotten  Son,  be  glorified  throughout  the 
whole  world.    Amen."  Calvin.] 

8.  Ver.  3.  "This  consideration  can  and  ought 
to  check  pride  and  arrogance,  and  prevent  us  from 
fiercely  erecting  our  horns,  being  mindful  of  that 
notorious  saying : 

Cornua  quifadunt,  ne  cornna  ftrre,  rteuienX. 

And  from  Zech.  i.  18-21  we  learn,  that  the  Lord 
can  easily  raise  up  smiths  lo  break  the  horns  of 
those  who  are  fierce  and  insolent."   Forstek. 
0.   Ver.  5.    "God  has  made  CUrist  a  horn  of 


salvation  to  His  church,  that  it  should  receive 
from  His  fulness  grace,  blessing,  strength  and 
power  Whoever  will  not  make  use  of  Christ  for 
this  purpose,  his  Cfirnal  ability  will  soon  go  to 
wreck  and  ruin.     Luke  i.  69."   Starke. 

10.  Ver.  5.  "When  Judea  denied  the  mystery 
of  oiiv  Lord's  incarnation,  which  the  Gentiles 
believed,  the  princes  of  Judea  fell  into  contempt, 
and  these  Gentiles,  who  had  been  oppressed 
while  guilty  of  unbelief,  were  elevated  into  the 
liberty  of  the  true  faith.  But  Jeremiah,  fore- 
seeing long  before  it  happened  this  fall  of  the 
Israelites,  says,  The  Lord  has  become  as  if  He 
were  an  enemy.  He  has  overthrown  Israel,  He  has 
overthrown  all  his  walls,  He  has  overthrown  His 
defences."  Grfg.  Papa,  Lib.  XL,  Moral.  Cap.  10, 
quoted  by  Ghisler., p.  70. 

11.  Ver.   5.     n-JXl  H'JNP.      "The   Vulgate 

_t;-:|-     t--:  |t 

version  has,  humiliatam  et  humiliationem  [one 
humbled  and  humiliation].  Avenarus  inter- 
prets invectum  et  invectionem  [attack  and  as- 
sault by  sea]  and  explains  it  as  relating  to  naval 
conflicts  and  the  various  methods  of  assaulting 
an  enemy :  since  both  words  are  from  anah,  which 
properly  signifies  to  be  carried  in  ships."  Forsier. 
[Note. — Forster  either  misquoted  the  Vulgate, 
or  intended  only  to  give  the  sense,  in  his  under- 
standing of  it.  The  Vulgate  is  humiliatmn  et  hu- 
miliatam; which  the  Douay  translates  "and  hath 
multiplied  in  the  daughter  of  Judea  the  afllicted, 
both  men  and  women."  The  Vulg.  is  a  translation 
of  the  Sept.:  /cat  inXifivvev  rf)  Ovyarpl  'lowJa  tottec- 
voi/iEVov  Kal  TeTaneivufiEVTjv. — W.  H.  H.] 

12.  Vers.  4,  6.  "Here  a  distinction  between 
the  evilof  c?-!77je  and  the  ey\\  of  punishment  is  to  be 
observed.  God  is  not  the  efficient  cause  of  the 
evil  of  crime.  The  opinion  of  Peter  Martyr,  in 
his  Commentary  on  the  first  chapter  of  Romans, 
is,  therefore,  impious  and  horrible, — '  I  cannot 
deny  that  God  is  in  every  way  the  cause  of  sin.' 
God  is,  however,  the  chief  cause  of  the  evil  of 
punishment,  being  a  just  Judge  and  the  avenger 
of  crimes.  In  this  sense  the  inimical  acts  of  the 
Babylonians  are  here  attributed  directly  to  Him." 

FiiRSTER. 

13.  Vers.  6,  7.  "The  Lord,  who  never  sufi"er8 
Himself  to  be  forgotten  '  causes  our  solemn  feasts 
and  the  Sabbaths  of  our  rest  to  be  forgotten,'  not 
because  the  rites  of  our  religion  do  not  please 
Him,  but  because  the  former  tabernacle  of  God 
or  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  us  is  pro- 
faned, and  there  is  now  no  place  in  which  those 
rites  may  be  so  oH'ered  as  to  please  God."  Pas- 
CHAS.  Radbertus  by  Ghisler.,  p.  79. 

14.  Vers.  6,  7.  "  The  Romanists,  therefore,  err 
when  they  pretend  that  Rome  is  tlie  fixed  and 
immovable  seat  of  the  church.  For  although 
the  Catholic  and  universal  church  cannot  cease 
to  exist  (Matt.  xvi.  18),  yet  that  particular 
churches  have  perished  and  can  perish,  experi- 
ence testifies,  yea  Rome  herself  testifies  by  an 
example  in  her  own  history.  .  .  .  What  is  here 
related  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  that  it  should 
assuredly  be  demolished  and  overthrown,  has 
happened  to  temples  of  Christ  at  the  hands  of  the 
Turks.  It  is  a  fact  also  especially  memorable, 
that  on  the  29th  day  of  May,  in  the  year  1453, 
the  Turks  having  assembled  and  taken  Constanti- 
nople, the  temple  of  Sophia,  esteemed  so  sacred, 
was    turned   into  a    horse-stable.      And    t  as  in 


CHAP.  II. 


99 


what  was  long  ago  written  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  59-64, 
and  also  Ps.  Ixxx.  13,  14."  Forster. — [Ver.  7. 
"  Had  he  only  spoken  of  the  city,  of  the  lands,  of 
the  palaces,  of  the  vineyards,  and,  in  short,  of 
all  their  possessions,  it  would  have  been  a  much 
lighter  matter;  but  when  he  says  that  God  had 
counted  as  nothing  all  their  sacred  things, — the 
altar,  the  Temple,  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  and 
festive  days, — when,  therefore,  he  says,  that 
God  had  not  only  disreg.irried,  but  had  also  cast 
away  from  Him  these  things,  which  yet  espe- 
cially availed  to  conciliate  His  favor,  the  people 
must  have  hence  perceived,  except  they  were  be- 
yond measure  stupid,  how  grievously  they  had 
provoked  God's  wrath  against  themselves  ;  for 
this  was  the  same  as  though  heaven  and  earth 
were  blended  together.  Had  there  been  an  up- 
setting of  all  things,  had  the  sun  left  its  place 
and  sunk  into  darkness,  had  the  earth  heaved  up- 
wards, the  confusion  would  have  hardly  been 
more  dreadful,  than  when  God  put  forth  thus  His 
hand  against  the  sanctuary,  the  altar,  the  festal 
days,  and  all  their  sacred  things.  But  we  must 
refer  to  the  reason  why  this  was  done,  even  be- 
cause the  Temple  had  been  long  polluted  by  the 
iniquities  of  the  people,  and  because  all  sacred 
things  had  been  wickedly  and  disgracefully  pro- 
faned. We  now,  then,  understand  why  the  Pro- 
phet enlarged  so  much  on  a  subject  in  itself  suf- 
ficiently plain."  Calvin.] 

15.  Ver.  7.  "Wherewith  one  sins,  therewith 
is  he  punished  (Wis.  xi.  17).  But  because  the 
most  heinous  sins  had  been  perpetrated  at  the 
altar  and  Divine  worship,  so  now  at  the  altar  the 
severe  chastisement  is  inflicted,  that  they  must 
be  deprived  of  it."  Cramer. — [Ver.  7.  They 
have  made  a  noise  in  the  house  of  Je- 
hovah — "  Why  did  He  grant  so  much  license 
to  these  profane  enemies?  even  because  the  Jews 
themselves  had  previously  polluted  the  Temple, 
so  that  He  abhorred  all  their  solemn  assemblies, 
as  also  He  declares  by  Isaiah,  that  He  detested 
their  festivals.  Sabbaths  and  new  moons  (i.  13, 
14).  But  it  was  a  shocking  change,  when  ene- 
mies entered  the  place  which  God  had  conse- 
crated for  Himself,  and  there  insolently  boasted, 
and  uttered  base  and  wicked  calumnies  against 
God !  But  the  sadder  the  spectacle,  the  more  de- 
testable appeared  the  impiety  of  the  people,  which 
had  been  the  cause  of  so  great  evils.  *  *  *  That 
the  Chaldeans  polluted  the  Temple,  that  they 
trod  under  foot  all  sacred  things,  all  this  the  Pro- 
phet shows  was  to  be  ascribed  to  the  Jews  them- 
selves, who  had,  through  their  own  conduct, 
opened  the  Temple  to  the  Chaldeans  and  exposed 
all  sacred  things  to  their  will  and  pleasure." 
Calvin.] 

16.  Ver.  9.  "God  is  careful  to  punish  con- 
tempt of  His  word  by  taking  away  that  word. 
The  curse  which  they  chose,  that  is  come  to  them ; 
the  blessing  they  did  not  choose,  that  is  far  from 
them,  Ps.  cix.  17."  Cramer. 

17.  Vers.  1-10.  "Although  God,  properly 
speaking,  allows  Himself  to  repent  of  nothing, 
and  His  gifts  and  callings  admit  of  no  change 
(Rom.  xi.  20),  yet  it  is  evident  from  this  passage, 
that  He  is  bound  to  no  particular  people,  espe- 
cially if  that  people  prove  to  be  godless  and  un- 
thankful towards  Him.  He  had  chosen  the  peo- 
ple of  Israel  for  His  own  peculiar  people,  Jerusa- 


lem for  His  dwelling,  where  He  had,  as  it  were 
His  fire  and  His  hearth  (Is.  xxxi.  9),  and  had 
lifted  it  up  to  Heaven ;  but  when  it  became  un- 
grateful aud  disobedient.  He  considered  not  all 
tuis,  but  cast  down  to  the  earth  all  the  glory  of 
Israel,  laid  waste  His  own  tabernacle,  destroyed 
His  dwelling,  overthrew  His  altar.  For  God  is 
not  only  merciful  and  kind,  but  also  an  angry 
and  just  Judge,  who  will  not  let  iniquity  go  un- 
punished, and  makes  His  chastisements  the  more 
severe  in  proportion  to  the  kindness  He  has  shown 
to  a  people,  when  they  are  ungrateful  and  god- 
less. This  should  be  a  solemn  warning  to  us." 
Wiirtemb.  Summ.  ["Even  those  doctrines,  or- 
dinances and  regulations,  which  are  most  exactly 
scriptural,  when  scrupulously  retained  by  men 
destitute  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  are  but'a  lifeless 
carcass  of  religion:  and  when  made  a  cloak  for 
iniquity,  God  abhors  them.  So  that,  in  the  day 
of  His  wrath  for  national  wickedness,  He  will 
despise  temples  and  palaces,  kings  and  priests, 
establishments  and  forms  of  every  kind."  Scott.] 

18.  Ver.  10.  They  have  cast  up  dust  upon 
their  heads,  etc.     Luctuspro  luxu.  Forster. 

19.  Ver.  11.  "EflFusion  of  the  liver  is  carnal 
mortification."    Bonavbntura,  quoted  by  Gnia- 

LER.,p.  91. 

20.  Ver.  13.  "  When  God  punishes  His  people 
on  account  of  their  sins.  He  punishes  them  more 
severely  than  He  does  other  peoples.  It  may  be 
said  of  Him,  The  dearer  the  child,  the  harder 
the  rod."  Osiandri  Bible  in  Starke.  ["  When 
we  wish  to  alleviate  grief,  we  are  wont  to  bring 
examples  which  have  some  likeness  to  the  case 
before  us.  For  when  any  one  seeks  to  comfort 
one  in  illness,  he  will  say,  'Thou  art  not  the  first 
nor  the  last,  thou  hast  many  like  thee ;  why 
shouldest  thou  so  much  torment  thyself;  for  this 
is  a  condition  almost  common  to  mortals.'  *  * 
The  Prophet,  then,  means  that  comforts  com- 
monly administered  to  those  in  misery,  would  be 
of  no  benefit,  because  the  calamity  of  Jerusalem 
exceeded  all  other  examples ;  as  though  he  had 
said,  'No  such  thing  has  ever  happened  in  the 
world;  God  had  never  before  thundered  so  tre- 
mendously against  any  people.'  *  *  Great  as  the 
sea  is  thy  breach;  that  is,  'Thy  calamity  is  the 
deepest  abyss.  I  cannot  then  find  any  in  the 
whole  world  whom  I  can  compare  to  thee,  for  thy 
calamity  exceeds  all  calamities ;  nor  is  there  any- 
thing like  it  that  can  be  set  before  thee,  so  that 
thou  art  become  a  memorable  example  for  all 
ages.'  But  when  we  hear  the  Prophet  speaking 
thus,  we  ought  to  remember  that  we  have  suc- 
ceeded in  the  place  of  the  ancient  people.  Aa 
then,  God  had  formerly  punished  with  so  much 
severity  the  sins  of  His  chosen  people,  we  ought 
to  beware  lest  we  in  the  present  day  provoke 
Him  to  an  extremity  by  our  perverseness,  for 
He  remains  ever  like  Himself."  Calvin.] 

21.  Ver.  14.  "  Preachers,  so  soothing,  are 
smooth-preachers  and  dumb  dogs,  who  bring 
great  and  irreparable  injury  to  a  whole  country, 
for  the  sun  shall  go  down  over  such  prophets  and 
the  day  shall  be  dark  over  them  (Mic.  iii.  6). 
And  although  they  may  receive  for  a  long  time 
good-will  and  favor,  money  and  encouragement 
from  men,  yet  tiiey  lose,  together  with  their 
hearers  who  delight  in  such  accommodating 
ministers,  all    "    '*-v  f'    m  the  living  God  :   Gal.  i. 


100 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


10;  James  iv.  4."  Cramer  according  to  Eg. 
HuNNius,  Ser.  3,  ch.  2.  p.  64.  ["  They  had 
wilfully  drunk  sweet  poison."  Calvin. — Prayer. 
"Grant,  Almighty  God,  that  though  Thou  chas- 
tisest  us  as  we  deserve,  we  may  yet  never  have 
the  light  of  truth  extinguished  among  us,  but 
may  ever  see,  even  in  darkness,  at  least  some 
sparks,  which  may  enable  us  to  behold  Thy  pater- 
nal goodness  and  mercy,  so  that  we  may  be  es- 
pecially humbled  under  Thy  mighty  hand,  and 
that  being  really  prostrate  through  a  deep  feel- 
ing of  repentance,  we  may  raise  our  hopes  to 
Heaven,  and  never  doubt  that  Thou  wilt  at  length 
be  reconciled  to  us  when  we  seek  Thee  in  Thine 
only-begotten  Son.  Amen."  Calvin.] 

22.  Vers.  15,  16.  "  He  who  suffers  an  injury, 
need  not  mind  mockery.  It  is  the  Devil's  special 
delight  to  make  a  mock  of  the  church  and  of  all 
the  pious,  so  that  the  godless  are  known  by  their 
great  Ahs  and  Ohs  (Wis.  v.  3) !  Let  not,  how- 
ever, ridicule  cause  us  to  waver,  but  let  us  re- 
main firm  and  faithful  to  God.  For  blessed  are 
ye  when  men,  for  My  sake,  revile  and  persecute 
you  and  say  all  manner  of  evil  againstyou  (Matt. 
V.  11).  For  God  can  easily  and  speedily  take 
away  again  such  reproach  and  put  to  silence  the 
triumphing  of  the  wicked,  and  apply  to  them  the 
song — Mine  eyes  will  see  that  they  shall  be  trod- 
den down  as  the  mire  of  the  streets  (Mio.  vii. 
10)."  Cramer  quoted  by  Eg.  Hunnius,  Ser.  4, 
ch.  2,  p.  73). 

23.  Vers.  14-16.  "  This  is,  in  truth,  the  root  of 
the  calamity,  that  the  prophets  in  the  service  of 
the  people  had  preached  in  accordance  with  carnal 
pleasures;  they  had  not  disclosed  but  concealed 
the  misdeeds  of  the  people,  and  thus  had  preached 
the  people  out  of  their  country,  and  into  captivi- 
ty. How  then  was  this  ?  Had  they  invented  new 
precepts?  made  another  catechism?  No,  nothing 
at  all  of  this  sort!  But  it  sufficed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  destruction,  that  they  mistook  the  Gospel, 
and  exercised  no  control  over  the  people  in  con- 
formity therewith,  but  instead  of  that  practised 
a  false  policy.  Now  the  enemies  of  Jerusalem 
and  of  God's  people  mock  and  imagine  that  all 
the  glorious  promises  of  the  Word  of  God  of  a 
kingdom  of  grace  among  men  have  come  to 
naught.  They  imagine  that  they  have  now  made 
it  evident  by  their  power,  that  the  mj'stery  of 
God's  grace  and  election  is  naught.  Poor  fools! 
They  know  not  that  God  is  in  all  this  ;  they  know 
nothing  of  that  God,  who  suffers  with  us  and  for 
us,  and   leads  us    through    suflfering  to  glory." 

DiEDlUCH. 

24.  Ver.  17.  "When  we  experience  God's  judg- 
ment and  chastisements  on  account  of  our  sins, 
we  ought  always  to  look  back  (1)  on  our  sins, 
(2)  on  God's  frequent  warnings  of  punishment, 
(8)  on  His  unchangeable  faithfulness,  and  (4)  on 
His  great  power  and  His  right  hand  which  can 
change  all  things,  Ps.  Ixxvii.  11 ;  Dan.  ix.  8  ; 
Ps.  li.  5."  Cramer,  quoted  by  Eg.  Hunnius,  Ser. 
4,  Ch.  II.,  pp.  74  ff.— [Ver.  17.  He  hath  ful- 
filled His  word  that  He  had  commanded 
in  the  days  of  old. — "  Had  the  Prophet  touched 
only  on  t  he  secret  counsel  of  God,  the  Jews  might 
have  been  in  doubt  as  to  what  it  was.  And  cer- 
tainly as  our  minds  cannot  penetrate  into  that 
deep  Jibyss.  in  vain  would  he  have  spoken  of  the 
hidJen  judgments   of  Gol.       h    wxi-i,   tlierefore, 


necessary  to  come  down  to  the  doctrine,  by  which 
God,  as  far  as  it  is  expedient,  manifests  to  us 
what  would  otherwise  be  not  only  hidden,  but 
also  incomprehensible  ;  for  were  we  to  inquire 
into  God's  judgments,  we  would  sink  into  the 
deep.  But  when  we  direct  our  minds  to  what 
God  has  taught  us,  we  find  that  He  reveals  to  us 
whatever  is  necessary  to  be  known  ;  and  though 
even  by  His  word,  we  cannot  perfectly  know  His 
hidden  judgments,  yet  we  may  know  them  in  part, 
and  as  I  have  said,  as  far  as  it  is  expedient  for 

us Let  us  then  hold  to  this  rule,  even  to 

seek  from  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  and  the 
Gospel,  whatever  we  desire  to  know  concerning 
the  secret  judgments  of  God  ;  for  were  we  to  turn 
aside,  even  in  the  smallest  degree,  from  what  is 
taught  us,  the  immensity  of  God's  glory  would 
immediately  swallow  up  all  our  thoughts ;  and 
experience  sufficiently  teaches  us,  that  nothing  is 
more  dangerous  and  even  fatal  than  to  allow  our- 
selves more  liberty  in  this  respect  than  what  be- 
hooves us.  Let  us  then  learn  to  bridle  all  curi- 
osity when  we  speak  of  God's  secret  judgments, 
and  instantly  to  direct  our  minds  to  the  word 
itself,  that  they  may  be  in  a  manner  inclosed 
therein."  Calvin.] 

25.  Ver.  18.  "  In  this  exhortation,  the  re- 
quisites of  true  and  ardent  prayer  are  shown. 
(1)  The  first  of  these  is  the  cry  of  the  heart  to  God, 
by  which  devoutness,  or  the  earnest  and  ardent 
desire  of  the  heart  is  denoted.  For,  as  Cyprian 
says,  in  his  12th  Sermon  on  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
God  hears  not  the  voice,  but  the  heart.  And  it 
is  commonly  said.  When  the  heart  does  not  pray, 
then  the  tongue  labors  in  vain.  (2)  Tears,  i.  e., 
by  metonomy,  true  penitence,  of  which  tears  are 
signs,  as  appears  in  the  case  of  the  sinful  woman 
(Luke  vii.  38),  and  of  Peter  (Luke  xxii.  62). 
And  well-known  is  that  saying  of  the  orthodox 
Father,  The  tears  of  sinners  are  angels'  bread 
and  angels'   wine."  Forster. 

26.  Vers.  18-22.  "Here  we  have  alesson, — when, 
to  whom,  and  how,  we  ought  to  pray.  We  should 
pray  always  and  not  faint,  as  Christ  teaches  us 
by  a  parable  (Luke  xviii.),  but  especially  when 
there  is  a  great  and  immediate  necessity,  as  Jere- 
miah did  here,  and  David,  The  anguish  of  my 
heart  is  great,  0  bring  me.  Lord,  out  of  my  dis- 
tresses (Ps.  XXV.  17).  To  this  Lord  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  here  points  the  people.  God  Himself 
calls  us  to  come  to  Him  only,  and  says,  Call  upon 
Me  in  the  day  of  trouble,  I  will  deliver  thee  and 
thou  shalt  glorify  Me  (Ps.  1.  15).  Not  alone 
should  your  mouth  pray,  but,  says  Jeremiah,  let 
your  heart  cry  to  God.  For  the  Lord  is  near  to 
those  who  call  upon  Him,  to  those  who  call  upon 
Him  with  earnestness  (Ps.  cxlv.  18).  We  should 
presentbefore  Him  circumstantially  our  necessity 
and  solicitudes,  with  tears  and  sighs,  as  Jere- 
miah here  directs.  For  although  God  well  knows 
beforehand  what  distresses  us  and  what  we  need, 
before  we  tell  Him  (Matt.  vi.  8),  yet  the  recital 
of  our  pressing  necessity  serves  to  make  us  more 
earnest  in  prayer;  for  God  will  have  those  who 
pray,  such  as  those  who  worship  Him  in  sj^irit 
and  in  truth  (John  iv.  23)."    M'urt.  Summaruii. 

27.  Ver.  19.  Arise,  cry  out  in  the  night. 
■  —"The  prayer  of  night — how  readily  it  rises  to 
God  the  only  Judge,  jind  to  the  Holy  Angel  who 
undertakes  to  present  it  before  the  Heavenly  al- 


CHAP.  II.  20-22. 


101 


tar!  How  grateful  and  bright,  colored  with  the 
blush  of  humility  !  How  serene  and  placid,  dis- 
turbed by  no  clamor  or  bustle!  And  last  of  all, 
how  pure  and  sincere,  sprinkled  with  no  dust  of 
earthly  care,  incited  by  no  praise  or  fljittery  of 
beholders!"  Bernard,  Serm.  86  on  the  Canticles, 
in  Ghisler.,  p.  108. 

28.  Ver.  20.  Behold,  O  Jehovah,  and  con- 
sider.— "  It  is  most  proper,  when  any  one  is 
overwhelmed  with  affliction,  that  he  keep  it  not 
entirely  to  himself,  but  disclose  it  to  such  per- 
sons as  may  come  to  his  relief  in  the  way  either 
of  help  or  of  comfort.  But  to  no  one  can  we 
better  and  more  advantageously  lament  our  dis- 
tresses and  solicitudes,  than  to  our  dear  God, 
for  He  is  our  confidence,  a  strong  tower  from 
tur  enemies  (Ps.  Ixi.  4)."  Cramer  quoted  by  Eg. 
HuNNius,  Ser.  4,  ch.  2,  p.  78. — [Prayer.  "Grant, 
Almighty  God,  that  as  Thy  Church  at  this  day  is 
oppressed  with  many  evils,  we  may  learn  to  raise 
up  not  only  our  eyes  and  our  hands  to  Thee,  but 
also  our  hearts,  and  that  we  may  so  fix  our 
attention  on  Thee  as  to  look  for  salvation  from 
Thee  alone  ;  and  that  though  despair  may  over- 
whelm us  on  earth,  yet  the  hope  of  Thy  goodness 
may  ever  shine  on  us  from  Heaven,  and  that, 
relying  on  the  Mediator  whom  Thou  hast  given 
us,  we  may  not  hesitate  to  cry  continually  to 
Thee,  until  we  really  find  by  experience  that  our 
prayers  have  not  been  in  vain,  when  Thou,  pity- 
ing Thy  church,  hast  extended  Thy  hand,  and 
given  U3  cause  to  rejoice,  and  hast  turned  our 
mourning  into  joy,  through  Christ  our  Lord. 
Amen."  Calvin.] 

29.  Ver.  21.  The  young  and  the  old. — 
"When  general  judgments  proceed  from  God,  the 
old  and  the  young  must  suffer  together:  the  old, 
because  they  have  not  rightly  educated  the 
young :  the  young,  because  they  have  imitated 
the  wickedness  of  the  old."  Cramer. 

30.  [Vers.  19-22.  "  Comforts  for  the  cure  of 
these  lamentations  are  here  sought  for  and  pre- 
scribed. The  two  most  common  topics,  that  their 
case  is  neither  singular  nor  desperate,  are  here 
tried,  but  laid  by,  because  they  would  not  hold. 
No  wisdom  or  power  of  man  can  repair  the  deso- 
lations of  such  a  broken,  shattered  state.  It  is 
to  no  purpose,  therefore,  to  administer  these 
common  cordials ;  therefore,  the  method  of  cure 
prescribed  is,  to  refer  her  to  God,  that  by  peni- 
tent prayer  she  may  commit  her  case  to  Him,  and 
be  instant  and  constant  in  her  supplications,  ver. 
19.  ^ Arise  out  of  thy  despondency,  try  out  in  the 
night,  watch  unto  prayer;  be  importunate  with 
God  for  mercy,  be  free  and  full,  be  sincere  and 
serious ;  open  thy  mind,  spread  thy  case  before 
the  Lord;  lift  up  thine  hands  towards  Him  in  holy 
desire  and  expectations;  beg  for  the  life  of  thy 
young  children.  Take  with  you  words,  take  with 
you  these  words,  ver.  20.  Prayer  is  a  remedy 
for  every  malady,  even  the  most  grievous.  And 
our  bueiness  in  prayer  ia  not  to  prescribe,  but  to 


subscribe  to  the  wisdom  and  will  of  God  ;  Lord^ 
behold  and  consider,  and  Thy  will  be  done."  Henri: 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

1.  Vers.  1-10.  As  a  warning  against  a  proud 
confidence  of  security,  our  text  can  be  used  for 
a  sermon  on  this  theme. — The  judgment  on  tha 
members  of  the  old  covenant  is  a  solemn  toarning  for 
the  members  of  the  new  covenant.     I.   The  judgment. 

1.  Who  judges?  The  Lord.  2.  How  does  He 
judge  ?  With  rigorous  righteousness.  3.  Why 
docs  He  judge?  Because  His  wrath  has  been 
provoked  by  sins.  II.  The  warning.  1.  They 
were  the  natural  branches:  we  engrafted  ones 
(Rom.  xi.  24).  They  had  for  their  part  only  the 
revelation  of  the  law  ;   we  the  revelation  of  grace. 

2.  From  this  it  follows  that  we  have  to  expect  a 
similar  judgment,  not  only  with  the  same,  but 
assuredly  with  greater  certainty. 

2.  Ver.  9.  The  blessing  of  a  well  ordered  political 
and  ecclesiastical  condition  of  affairs.  I.  What  be- 
longs to  such  order?  1.  That  the  civil  magis- 
tracy administer  the  law.  2.  That  the  teachers 
of  God's  word  rightly  divide  it.  II.  What  are 
the  salutary  fruits  thereof?  1.  In  a  temporal 
point  of  view.  Order,  Right  and  Righteousness, 
peace  and  general  prosperity.  2.  In  a  spiritual 
point  of  view.  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  peace 
on  earth  and  good  will  from  God  to  men. 

3.  Vers.  11,  12.  These  verses  could  be  preached 
upon  in  a  time  of  severe  famine.  I.  Describe  the 
actual  condition  of  things.  The  distress:  1,  of  the 
children;  2,  of  the  parents.  II.  Exhort  to  lively 
sympathy  and  the  actual  manifestation  of  pity. 

4.  Vers.  13,  14.  The  hurt  of  the  daughter  of 
Zion.  1.  Wherein  it  consists.  2.  Its  causes.  3. 
Its  cure. 

5.  Vers.  13,  14.  The  immense  responsibility  of  the 
office  of  the  preacher.  1.  To  whom  are  the  preachers 
responsible  (and  whose  word  have  they  therefore 
to  publish)  ?  2.  What  blessings  may  they  be  the 
authors  of  by  a  constant  consideration  of  this 
responsibility  ?  3.  What  injury  may  they  do  by 
not  considering  the  same  ? 

6.  Vers.  15,  16.  Warning  against  malicious  joy 
in  the  misfortunes  of  others.  We  understand  this  in 
a  double  sense;  whilst  we  (1),  warn  against  such 
conduct  as  may  make  one  a  subject  of  the  mali- 
cious joy  of  others;  (2),  we  warn  against  mali- 
cious exultation  over  the  misfortunes  of  others. 

7.  Vers.  16,  17.  The  impressive  sermon  which  is 
contained  in  great  calamities.     I.  These  warn  us ; 

1,  against  the  pride  which  goes  before  a  fall; 

2,  against  malicious  joy  over  the  fall  of  our 
neighbor.  II.  They  instruct  us,  1,  to  consider 
the  warnings  of  the  Lord  ;  2,  to  recognize  plain- 
ly His  hand  in  the  blows  which  befall  men. 

8.  Vers.  18-22.  l%e  prayer  of  the  distressed.  1. 
It  comes  out  of  the  heart.  2.  It  is  the  expres- 
sion of  deep  pain.  3.  It  is  not  satisfied  with  few 
words.     4.  It  is  directed  confidently  to  the  Lord 


102  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Chapter  III. 

THH  MIDDLE  SONG  CONSTITUTING  THE  CLIMAX  OF  THE  POEM :  ISRAEL'S  BRIGHTER  DAY  OF  CONSOLA- 
TION CONTRASTED  WITH  THE  GLOOMY  NIGHT  OP  SORROW  EXPERIENCED  BY  THE  SERVANT  OF  GOD 
[as    REPRESENTED    BY    JEREMIAH    HIMSELf]. 

This  Song,  which  as  the  third  one  of  the  five  holds  the  middle  place,  is  the  culmination  point  of  the  whole  book,  and  thus 
affords  a  strong  art^iiment  for  the  opinion,  that  the  whole  book  is  constructed  on  one  carefully  considered  plan.  It  is  the 
culmination  point,  both  as  to  its  matter  and  as  to  its  form.  As  to  its  matter,  because  we  have  here  the  sublimest  couceji- 
tions  of  suffering.  As  to  its  form,  because  here  the  art  of  the  Poet  displays  itself  in  full  splendor.  Tliis  appears,  first  of  all, 
in  the  alphabetical  arrangement.  Whilst  the  other  songs  have  only  twenty-two  alphabetically  arranged  verses,  this  on» 
contains  sixty-six  verses,  arranged  in  triplets,  the  three  verses  of  each  triplet  beginning  with  the  same  letter.  Each  verse 
is  a  distich,  composed  of  a  rising  and  falling  inflection.  The  ternary  division  is  ob.servable  not  merely  in  reference  to  the 
Terses  beginning  with  the  same  initial  letter,  but  with  regard  to  the  arrangement  of  the  whole :  for  the  whole  Song  is  na- 
turally divided  into  three  parts.    The  first  part  embraces  vers.  1-18  :  the  second,  vers.  19-42:  the  third,  vers.  43-66. 

PART  I. 

III.  1-18. 

N  Ver.  1.  I  am  the  man  who  saw  affliction 

By  the  rod  of  His  wrath. 
K  Ver.  2.  He  led  me  and  brought  me 

Into  darkness  and  not  light. 
Ji{  Ver,  3.  Surely  against  me  He  turned  His  hand 

Again  and  again  the  whole  day  long. 

^  Ver.  4.  He  caused  my  flesh  and  my  skin  to  waste  away, 

He  broke  my  bones. 
^  Ver.  5.  He  built  around  and  encompassed  me 

With  bitterness  and  distress. 
^  Ver.  6.  He  caused  me  to  dwell  in  dark  places, 

As  the  dead  of  old. 
^  Ver.  7.  He  hedged  me  in  that  I  should  not  go  forth, 

He  made  my  chain  heavy. 
J  Ver.  8.  Also,  lest  I  should  cry  and  call  for  help, 

He  shut  out  my  prayer. 
Jl  Ver.  9.  He  hedged  in  my  ways  with  hewn  stone, 

He  made  my  paths  crooked. 
"1  Ver.  10.  A  lurking  bear  was  He  to  me — 

A  lion  in  ambush. 
1  Ver.  11.  He  drove  me  aside — He  tore  me  in  pieces — 

He  left  me  sufteriug  and  alone. 
"1  Ver.  12.  He  bent  His  bow,  and  set  me 

As  the  mark  for  the  arrow. 
n  Ver.  13.  He  shot  into  my  reins 

The  sons  of  His  quiver, 
n  Ver.  14.  I  became  a  laughing-stock  to  all  my  people. 

Their  song  all  the  day. 
n  Ver.  15.  He  filled  me  with  bitter  things. 

He  made  me  drunk  with  wormwood. 
")  Ver.  16.  He  broke  my  teeth  with  pebbles. 

He  covered  me  with  ashes. 
1  Ver.  17.  Thou  didst  thrust  me  away  from  peace: 

I  forgot  good. 
1  Ver.  18.  Then  I  said,  My  confidence  and  my  hope 

Are  perished  from  Jehovah ! 

ANALYSIS. 

^fler  the  first  triad  of  verses^  containinrj  the  theme,  the  Poet,  or  rather  the  person  ivhom  the  Poet  represents 
as  speaking  [and  who  ivill  be  understood  as  aluun/s  intended,  where  the  sense  allows  it,  when  for  the 
sake  of  brevity  we  sai/  "the  Poet,")  describes  what  he  had  suffered  phi/sicalli/,  vers.  4,  5;  and  in 
regard  to  light  and  freedom,  vers.  6,  7;   how  the  Lord  had  rejected  his  prayer,  ver.  8;   that  up  his 


CHAP.   III.  1-3. 


103 


way,  ver.  9;  attacked  and  worried  him  like  a  bear  or  lion,  vers.  10,  11 ;  made  him  a  mark  for  hit 
arrows,  like  an  archer,  piercing  into  his  very  soul,  vers.  12,  13;  how  he  had  thus  become  an  object  of 
scorn  to  the  people,  ver.  14;  and  drunk  ivith  bitterness,  ver.  15;  and  how,  as  it  were,  they  had  given 
him  pebbles  to  bite  and  covered  him  icith  ashes,  ver.  16.  In  vers.  17,  18,  he  expresses  the  sense  of 
these  images  in  literal  language  ;  God  has  deprived  him  of  peace  and  happiness,  till  he  was  well  nigh 
compelled  to  throw  away  his  confidence  in  God.  Thus  ends  this  first  part,  in  which  the  name  of  the 
Lord  is  not  mentioned  except  as  the  last  wordof  \eT.  18,  where  it  appears  with  peculiar  ernphasis  and,  as 
it  were,  with  a  grating  dissonance.  It  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that  in  the  whole  of  this  first  part, 
only  those  sorrows  which  God  had  tent  upon  His  servant  are  spoken  of;  or  rather,  all  sorrows  which  befall 
him  are  made  to  appear  as  Divine  temptations.  Hence  the  suppression  of  JeliovaK s  name  tdl  the  very 
close ;  where  at  length  it  is  announced,  that  it  may  be  more  dreadfully  apparent  whom  it  was  that  the 
Poet  was  on  the  point  of  renouncing. 

destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  described  as  the  act 
of  God,  so  in  this  chapter  the  Poet  ascribes  all  his 
sorrows  to  God  as  their  author.  He  represents 
them  as  divine  temptations.  There  is  only  this  dif- 
ference, that  whilst  in  chap,  ii.,  the  name  of  God 
is  frequently  mentioned  (''J'^N,  niri'i  vers.  1,  2,  5, 
6,  7,  8),  in  chap.  iii.  God  is  spoken  of  in  vers.  1- 
16,  only  indefinitely  in  the  third  person,  in  ver. 
17  He  is  first  addressed  in  the  second  person,  and 
in  ver.  18  He  is  at  last  distinctly  mentioned  by 
name  (HiiT).  This  is  evidently  a  designed  climax. 
I  do  not  think  with  Engelhardt  (p.  85),  that  a 
tender  conscience  prevented  the  Poet  from  indi- 
cating the  Lord,  explicitly  by  name,  as  the  author 
of  his  profound  mental  agitation;  for  what  he 
did  in  chapter  second,  and  repeats  in  ver.  18  of 
this  chaptei',  he  could  have  done  in  vers.  1-16. 
But  this  making  the  name  of  God  prominent  in 
the  last  verse,  at  the  culmination  point  of  the 
description  of  his  sufferings,  is  due  to  the  art  of 
the  Poet,  of  which  this  Song  affords  striking  evi- 
dence. 


PRELIMINARY    NOTE. 

The  following  general  remarks  on  this  section 
are  to  be  observed.  1.  It  contains  a  description 
of  the  personal  sorrows  of  one  prominent  man. 
This  man  was  distinguished  by  his  position  as 
well  as  by  his  sufferings.  The  former  is  evident 
from  ver.  14,  where  it  is  said  he  had  become  a 
derision  to  all  the  people;  this  could  only  happen 
to  one  who  stood  out  conspicuously  before  the 
eyes  of  all  the  people.  The  second  appears  from 
the  fact,  that  he  is  described  as  one  burdened  with 
sorrows  more  than  all  other  persons  (vers.  1-3). 
2.  We  must  recognize  in  the  man  thus  made  con- 
spicuous the  prophet  Jeremiah.  For  not  only  the 
description  beginning  at  ver.  52,  undoubtedly  re- 
fers to  what  befell  this  prophet  as  related  in  Jer. 
xxxviii.,  but  also,  before  that  passage  occurs,  ver. 
14  plainly  indicates  this  prophet  (see  the  exposi- 
tion). There  is  then  no  doubt  that  this  Song  is 
put  into  the  mouth  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah.  3. 
As  in  chapter  second,  in  the  first  nine  verses,  the 


III.  1-3. 

1,  2       I  am  the  man  that  hath  seen  affliction  by  the  rod  of  His  wrath.     He  hath  led 
3  me  and  brought  me  into  darkness,  but  not  into  light.     Surely  against  me  is  he  turned ; 
he  turneth  his  hand  against  me  all  the  day. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL.. 

Ver.  1.— '^;3J  not  infrequent  in  Jer.,  xvii.  5,  7  ;  xxii.  30 ;  xxiii.  9,  etc.  In  Lamentations  in  this  chapter  only,  and  here 

four  times,  vers.  1,  27,  35,  39.— Jeremiah  never  uses  'JX,  see  i.  13.    The  choice  of  the  word  here  seems  due  to  similarity  of 

■  t: 
sound  with  '' JX,  comp.  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  16.— £33^  in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  two  critically  suspected  places,  x.  16  ;  xv.  19,  where 

iri/nj  t22\^  is  found.    This  exact  phrase  ijllj  V  122^  is  found  (as  has  not  been  before  remarked,  that  I  know  of)  in 

T-:|     ..v.  T ;  V        v 

Prov.  xxii.  8,  in  that  part  of  the  Proverbs,  too,  which  is  acknowledged  to  be  the  oldest  and  which  extends  from  x.  1  to  xxii. 
16.     The  expression  there  is  used  in  the  sense  of  being  blamed  by  men ;  here,  the  suffix  refers  to  it  God. — TT\2y,  see  ii.  2. 

Ver.  2.— jn J  not  in  Jeremiah  in  any  form.— Hiph.  tSiH  Jeremiah  often  uses,  ii.  16,  17 ;  xxxi.  9 ;  xxxii.  5.— The  sub- 
etantive  "ijiyn  never  in  Jeremiah.  He  seldom  expresses  this  general  thought,  and  when  he  does,  he  uses  other  words ; 
^\if2,  S2"ij^,  nio'7y.  xiii.16,17;  ii.6,  dSbX;  xxiii.  12,  H'SaXD ;  ii.  31.  [If  he  preferred  here  a  word  he  never  used  before, 
euphony  alone  would  suggest  it  to  liim.  It  happens,  however,  that  of  the  five  words  in  his  prophecies  above  cited, /our  of 
them  he  uses  only  once,  and  the  fifth,  riloS^,  only  twice;  and  one  of  the  five,  H'SSNO,  is  not  found  elsewhere  in  the 
Bible.  Where  such  variety  of  terms  are  used  to  express  the  same  idea,  the  introduction  of  another  new  one  may  be  deemed 
as  characteristic  of  the  author.  At  least  this  word  '!]fyn,  aflfords  no  evidence  against  Jeremiah's  authorship  of  Lamentar 
tions.— W.  H.  H.]— X~)1,  see  ii.  1,  2,  14, 17  ;  iii.  7,  49;  iv.  6.— With  respect  to  the  Ace.  loci,  see  ii.  21. 

Ver.  3.— IT  ';]£3n''_3ty'-  In  regard  to  the  peculiar  idiom  by  which  an  adverbial  idea  is  expressed  by  a  finite  verb, 
Bee  my  Or.,  g  95,  ff.  n.  [Also  Greek's  Gr.,  I  269].  In  Jer.  xviii.  4,  JK?  occurs  in  a  similar  construction  [see  marginal  read- 
ing in  E.  v.] 

I  in  this  chapter  are   too  evident  to  be   disputed. 
EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL.  '^.^'^^   ^^^^^  v/ovAs,  were   the   words   of  Jeremiah 

himself  must  be  the  opinion  of  all  who  read  thi« 

Ver.  1.  I  am  the  man. — [The  references  to    chapter  unprejudiced  by  a  theory  to  the  contrary 

the  personal  experiences  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah    (see   Introduction).      Cut   we  are  not  to  regard 


104 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


him  as  speaking  here  as  a  private  person.  He 
speaks  as  the  Prophet  of  Jehovah  raised  up  at 
that  particular  juncture,  to  stand  between  the  peo- 
ple and  their  covenant  God,  to  reveal  His  will  to 
them  and  to  present  their  interest  to  God  at  the 
throne  of  grace,  for  these  were  the  twofold  func- 
tions of  the  prophet's  office.  The  Prophet  there- 
fore was  a  representative  man.  He  stood  for  the 
people.  He  suffered  for  the  people.  He  spoke  for 
the  people.  Hence  in  this  Song  Jeremiah  easily 
passes  from  the  singular  to  the  plural  forms  of 
3peech,  from  /and  me,  to  ive  and  us.  [Gerlach: 
"The  supposition  thatinthis  chapter  the  personal 
sufferings  of  the  Prophet  are  the  subject  of  his 
Lamentation  (Michaelis,  Pareau,  Maurer,  Kal- 
KAR,  Bleek  in  his  Introduction),  cannot  be  cer- 
tainly proved,  either  from  ver.  14  (see  Coram,  on 
that  ver.),  nor  from  the  description  contained  in 
53-55,  where  the  possihilily  of  a  figurative  sense 
cannot  be  denied.  In  opposition  to  this  opinion  are 
the  following  arguments.  1.  From  the  fact  that  we 
imperceptibly  takes  the  place  of /in  ver.  22  and 
vers.  40-47,  we  may  conclude  that  in  the  rest  of 
the  chapter  also,  the  prophet  does  not  speak  only 
in  his  own  name  and  of  his  own  person.  2.  Un- 
less we  would  destroy  the  whole  connection  of 
the  chapter,  we  must  allow  that  the  calamity, 
recognized  in  vers.  42,  43,  as  the  punishment  of 
the  sins  of  the  people  {we  have  sinned),  is  the 
same  calamity  which  is  described  in  vers.  1-18 
with  reference  to  the  experience  of  a  single  in- 
dividual— an  opinion,  which,  by  manifold  agree- 
ments between  the  two  sections,  is  shown  to  be 
correct.  3.  The  lamentation  of  the  Prophet 
over  his  own  past  suffering,  in  the  actual  pre- 
sence of  a  great  national  calamity,  would  be  no 
less  improbable,  than  the  position  of  this  chap- 
ter, in  the  middle  of  four  others  lamenting  the 
national  calamity,  would  in  that  case  be  inappro- 
priate. The  Lamentation  of  this  chapter  is  then 
correctly  understood  only,  when  it  is  regarded  as 
a  lamentation  of  every  one  of  the  individual 
pious  Israelites,  as  a  lamentation  which,  while 
proceeding  from  self-experienced  mental  suffer- 
ings, has  its  truth,  neverthelesss,  for  all  pious 
Israelites,  in  whose  name  the  Prophet  speaks. 
This  was  perceived  by  Aben  Ezra,  when  he 
designated  the  individual  Israelites  as  the  sub- 
ject lamenting,  and  in  this  most  modern  inter- 
preters (ROSENMUELLER,  EwALD,  ThENIUS,  NEU- 
MANN, Vaihinger)  agree." — W.  H.  H.] — That 
hath  seen  affliction — who  saw  misery,  i.  e.,  ex- 
perienced it.  Raschi  is  of  the  opinion  that  the 
verb  here  expresses  the  idea  of  liviny  to  see  the 
fulfilment  of  the  destruction  predicted,  which 
would  suit  Jeremiah  alone.  But  in  that  case  it 
would  at  least  have  been  necessary  to  say  C^i^n) 

the  aflSiction,  or  misery.  The  verb  may  have  the 
sense,  in  a  general  way,  of  experiencing  or  liv- 
ing to  see,  as  frequently  (see  Jer.  v.  12  ;  Ps.  xvi. 
10;  xlix.  10;  Eccl.  viii.  16;  ix.  9).  But  the 
distinction  between  prophecy  and  fulfilment  is 
too  feebly  indicated,  to  admit  of  Raschi's  inter- 
pretation. The  Poet  has  rather  in  view  the  dis- 
tinction between  higher  and  comparatively  in- 
ferior degrees  of  suffering.  He  would  simply 
say  that  he  had  suffered  more  than  all  other  per- 
•ons.     Besides,  7nan  ("^3^)  would  be  too  indefinite. 


We  would  expect  seer  (Jlii'^),  or  prophet  (X'3J); 
[I  am  the  prophet,  or  seer,  who  has  lived  to  see 
the  fulfilment  of  my  own  predictions.] — By  the 
rod  of  his  wrath. — The  expression  can  only 
mean,  that  the  Poet  had  seen  misery  in  conse- 
quence of  God's  using  the  rod  of  His  wrath. 
Compare  Is.  x.  5,  where  the  Lord  calls  the  As- 
syrian the  rod  of  My  anger,  and  Job  ix.  34  ;  xxi. 
9,  where  the  rod  of  God  is  spoken  of  in  a  general 
way.  [Calvin:  "At  the  very  beginning  he  ac- 
knowledges that  whatever  he  suffered  had  been 
inflicted  by  God's  hand  .  .  .  there  is  included  in 
the  word  wrath  a  brief  confession,  especially 
when  it  is  added  by  the  rod,  or  staff."] 

Ver.  2.  He  hath  led  me  and  brought  me — 
He  led  and  brought  me — into  darkness  but  (or, 
and)  not  into  light. — The  metaphor,  [of  light 
and  darkness  for  prosperity  and  adversity]  is 
found  in  Am.  v.  18,  20 ;  Job  xii.  25,  expressed 
in  the  same  Hebrew  phrase. 

Ver.  3.  Surely  against  me. — The  threefold 
prominence  given  to  the  person  speaking,  by  the 
repetition  of  the  personal  pronoun  three  times  in 
the  beginning  of  the  Song,  is  not  without  a  rea- 
son. These  introductory  verses  thus  acquire  a 
thematic  character,  i.  e.,  it  is  thus  indicated  that 
the  speaker  intends  to  make  his  own  person  es- 
pecially a  the/)ie  of  discourse.  His  justification 
in  this  is,  that  he  can  with  good  reason  assume 
to  himself  the  personality  punished  to  the  greatest 
degree  by  sufferings  of  every  sort.  While  he  was 
this,  he  was  also  at  the  same  time  a  leader,  as  it 
were,  of  all  punished  in  the  same  way,  therefore 
the  representative  of  a  whole  class  of  sufferers, 
— of  the  Israel,  hated  by  men  but  beloved  of  God, 
of  the  'lapar/A  Kara  nvsv/ia — the  spiritual  Israel. 
This  explanation  would  not  stand,  if  we  were  to 
understand  the  whole  people  as  indicated  by  the 
man  in  ver.  1.  That  the  whole  people  are  not  so 
designated  by  the  man,  will  be  seen  further  on. 
For  the  present,  the  expression  itself,  the  man, 
furnishes  an  argument  against  it:  for  through- 
out the  book  Zion  is  always  spoken  of  as  a  fe- 
male. See  his  strongholds,  ii.  5,  where  only  the 
masculine  pronoun  is  used  in  reference  to  Zion, 
and  there  only  because  the  words  are  a  quotation. 
[Probably  the  pronoun  there  refers  to  God,  not 
to  Zion.  See  the  Notes.— W.  H.  H.]— Is  he 
turned ;  he  turneth  his  hand  against  me 
all  the  day, — turned  he  his  hand  always  again  the 
whole  day.  \_IIe  turns  Ilis  hand  again  and  again  the 
whole  day  long.  The  Hebrew  is  very  idiomatic. 
The  true  construction  is  explained  by  the  gram- 
matical note  of  Naegelsbach  above,  referring  to 
the  use  of  a  verb  in  an  adverbial  sense.  The 
best  grammarians  and  Versions  agree  in  this  con- 
st ruction.  Our  English  Version  is  obviously 
wrong,  not  only  because  it  translates  both  verbs 
transitively,  but  because  it  translates  them  in  dif- 
ferent tenses  and  is  obliged  to  supply  the  words 
against  me  in  the  last  clause.  The  verbs  are  both 
future  and  ought  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  the 
historical  imperfect,  because  the  Prophet  would 
express  the  constant  repetition  of  God's  strokes, 
or  else  as  a  present  tense,  because  the  prophet  is 
referring  to  sufferings  not  yet  at  an  end. — W. 
H.  H.]  AU  the  day.— See  i.  13;  iii.  14,62. 
[He  smote  me  and  continues  smiting  me  again  and 
again,  all  the  day  long. — W.  H.  H.] 


CHAP.  III.  4-9.  IOj 


III.  4-9. 

4,  5       My  flesh  and  my  skin  hath  he  made  old :  he  hath  broken  my  bones.     He  hath 

6  builded  against  me,  and  compassed  me  with  gall  and  travail.     He  hath  set  me  in 

7  dark  places,  as  they  that  be  dead  of  old.     He  hath  hedged  me  about,  that  I  cannot 

8  get  out :  he  hath  made  my  chain  heavy.     Also,  when  I  cry  and  shout,  he  shutteth 

9  out  my  prayer     He  hath  inclosed  my  ways  with  hewn  stone :  he  hath  made  my 
paths  crooked. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  4. — Jeremiah  uaes  "It^J  often,  vii.  21 ;  xii.  12,  etc. ;  "11_y,  once,  xiii.  23.  The  two  words  occur  in  cOanectiop,  es- 
pecially in  Leviticus,  xiii.  2-4  ;  xi.  38,  39.    Comp.  besides  .Tob  xix.  20,  Prov.  v.  11 ;  Lam.  iv.  8  ;  v.  10. 

Ver.  5. — np''1  involves,  like  31tJ'\  ver.  3,  au  adverbial  relation  to  the  principal  verb,  see  ver.  3.  [There  is  no  necessity 
for  this  construction  here,  nor  are  the  verbs  so  nearly  synonymous  as  to  render  this  construction  likely.  It  is  better  to 
take  the  two  verbs  as  having  the  same  relation  to  ' /J/,  and  the  same  subjective  accusative  in  HN /HI  E'XT- — ^  7j/  nj3- 

T-  tt;  -ttt 

Gesenius  :  "  God  hath  huilded  against  me,  obstructed  me,  shut  up  my  way  on  every  side  so  that  I  cannot  get  out." — W.  H.  H.] 
— TP*^'  <''sswhere  frequently  in  the  sense  circuve,  circumdare  (see  Jos.  vi.  3  ;  Ps.  xvii.  9  ;  xlviii.  13,  etc.),  means  also  cir- 

cumponere,  and  that  which  is  placed  around  in  the  accusative  by  itself.  So  also  Joli  xix.  6.  The  word  is  lot  found  in  Jere- 
miah.— ^H'\  (in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  connection  IJ/XT  'D,  viii.  14 ;  ix.  14;  xxiii.  15)  is  of  uncertain  derivation,  but  in- 
dicates undoubtedly /jotson  (see  Deut.  xxix.  17  ;  xxxii.  32,  33;  Lam.  ill.  19).  The  word  connected  with  it,  HX 'r*,  does  not 
occur  in  Jeremiah,  although  he  used  the  verb  HX/,  comparatively  speaking,  frequently,  vi.  11 ;  ix.  4  ;  xii.  .J  ;  xv.  6;xx. 

T  T 

9.    The  meaning  is  difficulty,  labor,  Ex.  xviii.  8  ;  Num.  xx.  14  ;  Neh.  ix.  32  ;  Mai.  i.  13. 

Ver.  6. — D'^E'nO,  not  in  Jeremiah. — 3'iyin,  Jer.  xxxii.  37.  [This  word  does  not  imply  the  posters  of  sitting,  as  Hen- 
derson imagines,  when  he  says  the  language  may  refer  "  to  an  ancient  custom  of  placing  the  dead  bodies  in  a  sitting  pos- 
ture in  the  sepulchres." — W.  H.  H.]  , 

Ver.  7. — nj,  Jeremiah  never  uses.     [Observe,  this  is  an  initial  word.     See  Intr.,  Add.  Rem.  (6),  p.  31. — W.  II.  II.] — X/l 

X]^ X  is  found  in  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  9,  word  for  word.     For  the  construction  [of  1  with  the  future,  that  1  could  not  gofortii]  see  my 

ffr.,  g  89,  3  6,  2;  1 109,  3.— lODH  is,  to  say  the  least,  foreign  to  Jeremiah's  style.    Comp.  1  Kings  xii.  10,  14.— flt^nj,  in 

the  sense  of  a  fetter,  only  here ;  elsewhere  DT^tJ'n J,  Jer.  xxxix.  7  ;  lii.  11,  etc. 

Ver.  8. — pj?i,  in  the  sense  of  crying  to  God,  frequently  with  Jeremiah,  for  example  xi.  11,  12 ;  xx.  8 ;  xxv.  34. — Tha 

verb  ^'Iti*  (see  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  14)  used  only  in  Piel,  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah;  he  uses  only  the  substantive  derived  from  it 

n^lti',  which  also  occurs  in  our  chapter,  ver.  56. — The  verb  Ont!',  thus  written,  occurs  only  here.     It  is  merely  a  scribal 

variety  of  DPD  ;  see  I^E^  ii.  6.    Jeremiah  uses  neither.    The  sense  is  obstruere  (of  wells.  Gen.  xxvi.  15, 18  ;  2  Kings  iii.  19, 

25),  occludere,  recludere  (of  prophetical  mysteries,  Dan.  viii.  26 ;  iv.  9).  [Mich.^elis,  Rosenmueller,  Geklach  :  Ohstruxit  pre- 
cibus  ma's  xHam  qua  perivnire  ad  suas  aures  j)o.ssint.] 

Ver.  9. — jTHi  not  in  Jeremiah.    May  tliere  not  be  an  allusion  to  stones  with  which  the  grave  is  built  up? — rii^'DJ 

•T  •  ; 

inJer.  vi.  16;  xviii.  15. — Piel  niV  occurs  only  in  Is.  xxiv.  1.    Jeremiah  uses   Hiph.  twice,  D3"^T  ^llTt;  iii.  21,  Pliyn 

1  .         T  ■  T  :  -       -."Iv  ■■-:\- 

^X /J,  ix.  4.    That  T\^^  T\13'nj  indicates  the  destruction  of  the  via  munita,  as  Thenius  would  have  it,  I  do  not  believe. 

For  in  Is  xxiv.  1,  H'^  signifies  not  e?'er<ere,  but  perrertere.    [Gerlach:  "  rUTlJ  is  not  a  carefully  constructed  causeway 

T  •  I  T     •  : 

(Thenius),  which  is  rather  the  meaning  of  TlvDO,  but  is  rather  the  path  worn  by  the  steps  of  the  traveller,  then  any  small 

by-road  (see  Jer.  xviii.  15,  where  PI /17D  N/  ^"IT  is  added  epexegetically  to  ni3T\J)-"] 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

It  may  be  observed  here  that  the  speaker, 
having  in  the  introductory  verses  1-3  designated 
himself,  in  general  terms,  as  the  man  most 
severely  punished,  now  proceeds  to  prove  this  in 
detail. 

Ver.  4.  He  begins  with  direct  personal  suffer- 
ings in  his  flesli,  skin  and  bones.  My  flesh 
and  my  skin  hath  he  made  old. — He  wasted 
aivay  viy  fie.sh  tnidvu/  skin.  The  verb  rendered  he 
made  old,  in  the  Kal,  has  an  intransitive  significa- 
tion, atteri,  consumi,  to  be  wasted  away  by  attri- 
tion, to  be  consumed,  especially  of  garments 
(Deut.  viii.  4;  xxix.  5 ;  comp.  Is.  1.  9  ;  li.  6)  and 
of  the  bodily  faculties  (Gen.  xviii.  12)  :  in  the 
Piel,  which  is  used  here,  it  means  atterere,  to  wear 
out  by  attrition  [the  verb  means  tore<6],  constimerc. 


to  consume,  waste  away ;  it  is  found  in  this  sense, 
besides  here,  in  Ps.  xlix.  15;  Job  xxi.  13;  Is. 
Ixv.  22;  1  Chron.  xvii.  19. — He  hath  broken 
my  bones.  He  broke  (see  ii.  9)  my  bones  [Hen- 
derson :  Broke  in  pieces^.  The  same  phrase  oc- 
curs in  Is.  xxxviii.  13.  See  Ps.  li.  10 ;  Job  xxx. 
17,  and  the  declaration  of  the  contrary  in  Ps. 
xxxiv.  21.  [The  breaking  of  the  bones  indicate, 
not  only  the  loss  of  physical  strength,  but  a  con- 
dition of  great  suffering.  "The  hones  are  often 
represented  in  the  Scriptures  as  the  seat  of  acute 
pain"  (Barnes.)  Job  xx".  11;  xxx.  17»;  Ps.  vi. 
2;  xxii.  14;  xxxi.  10;  xxxviii.  3;  xlii.  10;  Prov. 
xiv.  30.  We  can  only  take  the  phrase  here  in 
the  metaphorical  sense.  He  was  suffering  both 
physical  weakness  and  physical  pain. — W.  H.  H.] 
Ver.  5.  Now  follow  the  hindrances  which  have 
been  raised  against  him  from  without.  And  first 
he  says,  he  had  been  built  around  with  poison 


lOG 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


ami  trouble. — He  hath  builded  against  me 
and  compassed  me  with  gall  and  travail. 

He  built  up  against  me  and  round  about  me  poison 
and  difficult!/.  \_He  built  around  me,  and  encovi- 
passed  \_me'\  with  bitterness  and  distress. — VV.  H.  H.j 
The  image  of  a  beleaguered  city  lies  at  the  foun- 
dation of  the  thought  here.  But  we  are  not, 
with  the  older  commentators,  to  supply  wall 
CnjfD),  or  some  similar  word  after  the  verb  built, 

T 

but  rather  are  to  take  gall  and  travail  [poison  and 
difficulty]  as  the  object  of  that  verb.  The  connec- 
tion of  words  and  thoughts  here  is  singular,  and 
has  not  up  to  the  present  time  been  sufficiently 
elucidated.  Perhaps  the  Poet  would  say  that 
the  Lord  had  surrounded  him,  not  only  with  hard- 
ehips  of  every  sort,  but  wiiii  adversities  in  them- 
selves ruinous,  it  is  however  possible  that  in  the 
word  poison,  Wii"),  the  idea  of  bitterness  (see  Ps. 
Ixix.  22)  may  predominate.  Any  way  a  sudden 
transition,  from  a  figurative  to  a  literal  style  of 
speaking,  is  effected.  [There  is  perhaps  no  more 
difficulty  here  than  is  created  by  an  attempt  to 
reduce  a  metaphorical  expression  to  the  terms 
of  a  literal  and  actual  fact.  To  enclose  and  en- 
compass one  with  bitterness  and  trouble  or  dis- 
tress (using  the  abstract  for  the  concrete,  i.  e., 
with  circumstances  causing  bitterness  and  dis- 
tress), as  if  these  were  obstructing  walls,  is  un- 
doubtedly the  sense  of  our  text,  and  is  adopted 
by  most  of  the  versions  and  commentators. — W. 
H.  H.] 

[The  Sept.,  the  Takg.  and  the  Arab,  (not  the 
VuLG.  as  Blaynet  says),  render  K'XI,  as  if  it 
were  ^E'Sil,  7ny  head.  But  these  and  all  the 
ancient  versions  translate  the  same  word  in  ver. 
19,  by  gall.  The  Sept.  also  translates  TMiir}  as 
a  verb,  kfi6x'&T]aev.  Blayney  adopts  these  read- 
ings of  the  Sept.,  but  instead  of  elucidating  the 
meaning,  confuses  it  still  more  by  a  new  transla- 
tion of  the  first  clause :  "  He  hath  built  upon  me, 
and  encompassed  my  head,  so  that  it  is  weary." 
Henderson  adopts  partially  the  Sept.  transla- 
tion, but  discovers  a  new  and  doubtful  meaning 
for  the  second  verb,  TPI^t  H^  hath  builded  against 
me  and  struck  me  on  the  head,  and  it  is  distressed. 
Fuebst  proposes  (See  his  Lex.  under  the  word 

nxSn)  to  carry  out  the  military  idea  suggested 
by  the  verbs,  thus ;  He  ha.s  surrounded  me  with 
fortifications  and  a  trench.  But  it  is  hardly  neces- 
sary to  accept  the  new  and  unauthorized  deriva- 
tions of  these  words,  when  their  frequent  use 
gives  us  a  sense,  that  is,  indeed,  metaphorical, 
but  none  the  less  clear  and  expressive,  and  sus- 
tained so  generally  by  the  Versions,  old  and  new. 
— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  6.  To  the  obstructions  of  the  way  are 
added  the  obstructions  of  light.  This  whole  verse 
is  reproduced  word  for  word  in  Ps.  cxliii.  3. — He 
hath  set  me  in  dark  places.  He  caused  me  to 
dwell  in  darkness. — As  they  that  be  dead  of 
old. — As  the  dead  of  olden  time.  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  5-7 
and  11-13,  afford  the  best  commentary  on  this. 
There  are  those  dead  before  the  appointed  time, 
whom  the  Lord  remembers  no  more,  and  to  whom 
He  shows  no  more  the  wonders  of  His  grace. 
The  expression  is  found  only  here  and  in  Ps. 
cxliii.  3.     LWe  may  translate  it  either  the  dead  of 


old,  or  the  forever  dead.  Blayney:  "God  had  in- 
volved him  in  such  a  depth  of  distress,  that  he 
was  as  incapable  of  extricating  himself,  as  those 
who  had  laid  long  in  the  dark  mansions  of  the 
dead  were  of  making  their  escape  thence."  Ger- 
lach;  "He  is  thrust  into  the  darkness  of  the 
grave  (Ps.  Ixxxviii.  5,  6),  or  of  Sheol  (Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  7;  Job  x.  21,  22) — as  an  image  of  dis- 
tress, Ps.  XXX.  1;  Ixxxviii. — like  the  dead  of  eter- 
nity, the  forever  dead  (Vulg.,  mortui  sempiterni). — ■ 
Most  commentators  (Michaelis,  Rosenmueller, 
Maurer,  De  Wette,  Ewald,  Thenius,  Neu- 
mann, Bottcher)  explain,  the  dead  o/oW=those 
a  long  time  dead;  but  whether  dead  a  long  or  a 
short  time  makes  no  difference,  and  this,  asCoNZ 
has  correctly  remarked,  'would  occasion  an  ab- 
surd ambiguity,  as  if  the  dead,  who  have  been 
but  a  little  while  dead  and  buried,  might  not  lie 
in  darkness.'  The  Chal.  :  Mortui  qui  vadunt  in 
alterum  seculum  (mundum).^' — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  7.  A  climax!  Not  only  has  the  Lord 
surrounded  him  with  obstacles  and  deprived  him 
of  light,  but  He  has  also  taken  away  his  freedom. 
He  is  imprisoned  and  fettered !  He  hath 
hedged  me  about,  that  I  cannot  get  out. 
He  hedged  me  in  that  I  could  not  get  out  [or,  that  1 
should  not  escape,  or  go  forth. — The  very  words  of 
Christ  in  the  passion  psalm,  Ixxxviii.  9  (Words- 
worth) ].  He  hath  made  my  chain  heavy, 
— He  made  heavy  my  chain,  or  fetter. 

Ver.  8.  The  Lord  accepts  none  of  the  sufferer's 
prayers.  He  hears  him  not.  [Henderson  : 
"  The  prophet  places  himself  in  the  position  of  a 
prisoner,  who  is  securely  immured,  and  to  whose 
supplications  for  deliverance,  how  earnestly 
soever  they  may  be  made,  no  attention  is  paid."] 
Also  when  I  cry  and  shout,  he  shutteth  out 
my  prayer.  Also  though  I  cry  and  call  for  help, 
my  prayer  has  he  barred  or  bolted.  [The  idea  is, 
hindered  or  obstructed.  He  has  taken  means,  by 
anticipation,  to  prevent  my  prayer  for  help  from 
being  heard,  either  by  Himself,  or  by  any  other 
who  might  possibly  come  to  the  rescue.  The 
change  from  the  future  tenses,  to  the  preterite 
tense,  seems  to  indicate  this  meaning. — W.  H.  H.] 
Tne  sense  cannot  be  that  the  Lord  prevented  the 
prayer  from  going  out  of  the  man's  heart,  for 
in  fact  he  cried  (see  Rosenmueller  in  loc),  but 
that  He  shut  up  the  way  of  access  to  His  owa 
ear  and  heart.  Comp.  ver.  44;  Prov.  i.  28. 
[Wordsworth  :  "  So  the  suffering  Messiah  says, 
Ps.  xxii.  2,  "0  my  God,  I  cry  in  the  daytime, 
but  Thou  hearest  not."  Gerlach:  "However 
loudly  he  prays,  the  Lord  has  closed  His  ear; 
ver.  44;  Job  xix.  8;  Is.  i.  15;  Jer.  vii.  16;  Ps. 
xviii.  42;  Prov.  i.  28."] 

Ver.  9.  The  right  way  is  built  up  against  the 
Poet,  so  that  he  seems  compelled  to  false  ways. — 
He  hath  inclosed — lie  hedged  in  [same  word 
as  in  ver.  7] — my  w^ays  vrith  hewn  stones. 
If  hewn,  then  large  stones,  for  we  do  not  build 
with  small  ones.  Comp.  Ex.  xx.  25 ;  1  Kings  v. 
81;  Is.  ix.  9;  Am.  v.  11;  Ezck.  xL  42.— He 
hath  made — he  made — my  paths  crooked. 
The  Poet  would  say  that  he  had  been  forced  to 
crooked  and  false  paths.  See  crooked  ways,  Ps. 
cxxv.  5;  crooked  things.  Is.  xlii.  1(3.  [At  the  first 
glance  this  would  seem  to  be  a  continuation  of 
the  figure  contained  inverses  7,  8.  This  impres- 
sion is  due  to  the  repetition  of  the  word  1^J,  hedged 


CHAP.  III.   10-18. 


107 


in,  and  to  the  climax  implied  by  hewn  stone.  The 
idea,  in  that  case,  is,  that  having  imprisoned  him 
and  loaded  him  with  fetters  and  shut  out  his  cry 
for  help,  God  proceeds,  as  it  were,  to  make  his 
imprisonment  permanent  and  secure,  by  building 
up  around  him  a  wall  of  hewn  stone.  If  this  is 
so,  then  the  last  clause  cannot  mean  Be  made  my 
paths  crooked,  for  one  in  the  situation  described 
must  remain  an  inactive,  passive  sufferer;  but  it 
would  mean  that  God  had  made  all  paths  of  es- 
cape impassable.  The  principal  avenues  of  escape 
('D"^T)  are  built  up  with  hewn  stones,  barriers 
that  cannot  be  scaled.  The  smaller  paths  VI\\yr\l) 
are  brolien  up,  turned  upside  down,  and  thus 
rendered  impassable.  This  is  Gerlach's  view. 
It  is  better,  however,  to  regard  this  verse  as  in- 
troducing a  new  metaphor,  which  is  continued 
in  ver.  10.  "He  next  conceives  of  himself  as  a 
traveller  whose  way  is  blocked  up  by  a  solid  wall, 
and  who,  being  compelled  to  turn  aside  into  the 
devious  pathways  of  the  forest,  is  exposed  to  the 
rapacity  of  wild  beasts"  (Henderson).  This 
view  is  recommended  by  the  following  considera- 
tions. 1.  The  figure  of  an  immured  and  fettered 
prisoner  is  already  complete,  and  could  receive 
no  additional  force  from  what  is  here  said.  2. 
The  repetition  of  the  verb  l^il,  hedged  in,  which 
in  ordinary  cases  would  indicate  a  continuance 


of  the  same  subject,  is  accounted  for  here  by  tht 
necessity  of  a  word  with  the  same  initial  letter. 

3.  The  expressions  "wyways"  and  ''my  paths." 
favor  this  construction.  They  are  his,  because 
he  is  expected  to  pursue  them.  Were  they  sim- 
ply the  ways  and  paths  of  possible  escape  from 
the  place  of  confinement,  they  would  not,  stricily 
speaking,  be  hisa,t  all,  for  he  could  not  use  them. 

4.  This  explanation  makes  the  next  verse  h-ss 
abrupt,  and  produces  a  regular  and  beaut  ilul 
succession  of  metaphorical  pictures.  5.  Tbe  iclru 
of  simply  breaking  up  or  turning  over  the  ////- 
paths,  as  expressed  by  the  Hebrew  verb  nj>, 
does  not  correspond  with  the  security  against 
escape  expressed  by  building  up  the  main  ave- 
nues of  escape  with  hewn  stone.  6.  The  common 
translation.  He  made  iny  palJi  crooked,  best  agrees 
with  the  force  of  the  Hebrew  verb,  and  is  adopted 
with  great  unanimity  by  the  Versions  and  com- 
mentators. Owen:  "The  m<2&n\ng\s  turned  aside. 
He  had  built,  as  it  were,  a  wall  of  hewn  stones 
across  his  way,  and  thus  He  turned  aside  liis  go- 
ings or  his  paths,  so  that  he  was  constrained  to 
take  some  other  course."  Wordsworth:  "Not 
only  hath  He  blocked  up  my  way  with  hewn 
stones,  but  He  has  turned  my  paths  aside  from 
their  proper  direction."  So  E.  V.,  Broughton, 
Calvin,  Blatney,  Bootheoyd,  Henderson,  and 
NoYES.— W.  H.  H.] 


III.  10-18. 


10,  11       He  was  unto  me  as  a  bear  lying  in  wait,  and  as  a  lion  in  secret  places.     He 

12  hath  turned  aside  my  ways,  and  pulled  me  in  pieces :  he  hath  made  me  desolato.    He 

13  hath  bent  his  bow,  and  set  me  as  a  mark  for  the  arrow.     He  hath  caused  the  arrows 

14  of  his  quiver  to  enter  into  my  reins.     I  was  a  derision  to  all  my  people,  and  their 

15  song  all  the  day.     He  hath  filled  me  with  bitterness,  he  hath  made  me  drunken 

16  with  wormwood.     He  hath  also  broken  my  teeth  with  gravel-stones,  he  hath  covered 

17  me  with  ashes.     And  thou  hast  removed  my  soul  far  off  from  peace:  I  fbrgat  pros- 

18  perity.     And  I  said,  My  strength  and  my  hope  is  perished  from  the  Lord. 


TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  10. — Jeremiah  never  mentions  bears.  [Tlie  need  of  an  initial  T  would  naturally  suggest  the  bear  in  connection  with 
the  lion.    See  Intr.,  Add.  Rem.  (0),  p.  31.— W.  H.  H.]— Jeremiah  uses  31X  only  once,  in  the  phrase  D'^IJ^D  ^U'DPI,  'i.  12,— 

~  T  '    :      T  .    T 

C^nOiD  Jeremiah  uses  often,  xiii.  17  ;  xxiii.  24;  xli.x.  10. 
•  T  ;    • 
Ver.  11. — nt^i3,  "'f-  Aeyd^x.     In  the  Aramaic  it  stands  for  HP  J  in  frustra  dissecuit  (Lev.  i.  G,  12),  for  tIDtO  dilaniavit 

(Job  XVI.  9),  for  nD!2?  dissecuit,  p"l£3  /regit  (1  Sam.  xv.  33 ;  Ps.  vii.  3).  See  Cur.  B.  Mich.^elis  in  Rosenmueller  and  Ges. 
Thes.,  p.  1153. — For  relation  of  0012'  to  Jeremiah's  style  and  use  of  language,  see  i.  4.  U^f^  Jeremieih  uses  not  infre- 
quently, xii.  11  ;  xiii.  16;  xvii.  5,  etc.     [D31ty  would  be  suggested  here  as  alliterative  with  preceding  word.— W.  II.  H.] 

Ver.  12. — 3'Vn  in  Jer.  v.  26;  xxxi.  21  — rT^QD,  in  the  sense  of  custodia,  a  place  of  custody,  frequently  in  Jeremiah, 

T  T  - 

xxxii.  2,  12,  etc.  In  the  sense  of  a  mark,  only  here.  Job  xvi.  12,  and  1  Sam.  xx.  20.  See  Gesen.  Tfies.,  p.  511  «.  v.,  Vfl- 
With  regard  to  its  Aramaic  termination  X—  (see  XJE?',  iv.  1).  See  Olsh.,  g  38  /.,  108  e  [Green's  Gr.,  g  196  d].  This  is  no 
evidence  against  Jeremiac  authorship,  since,  not  only  analogies  occur  in  Jeremiah  (see  H^"],  1.  11 ;  XiJ'J,  xxiii.  39),  but 

TT  T 

scattered  examples  occur  also  in  older  books.     See  Olsh.  as  above.— vpi,  Jer.  ix.  7  ;  1.  9, 14,  etc. 

Ver.  13.— Hiph.  XOH  often  in  Jeremiali,  iii.  14 ;  xx.  5 ;  xxv.  9,  13,  ete.— Jeremiah  also  uses  HiJK^X  (v.  15),  but  ' J3 
n3K/X  occurs  only  here.  The  arrow  is  called  r\^p-'l2  in  Job  xli.  20.  See  ntyi-"J3,  sons  of  flame,  of  lightning,  by  which 
many  interpreters  understand  arrows,  others  sparks,  and  others  birds.     See  also  IDi"  'JS,  Zech.  iv.  14;  tOt!'-?3,  Is.  v.  1. 

Ver.  14.— The  words  phi:?  T\''''n  are  taken  from  Jer.  xx.  7,  where  it  is  said, ''S  Jji'?  »1rf3  DITI-Sd  plllK'S  Tl"?! 

—nj'JJ  Jeremiah  never  uses.    See  Lam.  iii.  63 ;  v.  14. 
T  .  : 


108 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Ver.  15. — Jeremiah  uses  Hiph.  j^'Stj^n,  v.  7. — 3'''^1'^r3,  besides  here  only  in  Ex.  xii.  8;  Num.  ix.  11. — Hiph.  711171 

Ter.  xxxi.  25. — HJV  7,  wormwood,  absintfiium,  Jeremiah  uses  in  ix.  14;  xxiii.  15. 
T-:|- 
Ver.  16. — The  verb  0'^i,  contundere,  comminuere,  is  found  besides  here  only  in  Ps.  cxix.  20. — The  verb  \^22  occurs  only 
-  T  .         -  T  . 

here.     It  is  in  Hiph.,  and  means  ohruit,  cooperuit.    [All  the  ancient  Versions  seem  to  have  considered  Uf33  same  as  iy33- 

~  T  "-  T 

The  Sept.,  ei^u/nitreV  fie  a-rroSov,  is  rendered  by  Vulg.  cibavit  me  cinere,  "  as   if  from  lj/33  came   the  Latin  word  dims  " 

-    T 

(Blatjtey)  ;  but  this  meaning  cannot  be  extracted  from  the  fundamental  sense  of  the  root  (see  Fderst).  The  Targ.  rendered 
it  laid  low,  which  gives  good  sense,  and  is  adopted  by  Blatnet,  Boothroyd.  Owen  and  C.  B.  Michaelts.  The  Arabic,  rolled 
me  in  the  ashes,  which  is  adopted  by   Luther,  E.  V.  marg.,  J.  D.  Michaelis  and  Ewald.    The  Syr,  besprinkled,  or  covered, 

which  is  generally  accepted  as  the  correct  meaning.— W.  H.  H.]— "liJN  in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  kindred  expression  'C?73nn 

"13X3,  vi.  26 ;  Comp.  Ezek.  xxvii.  30. 

Ver.  17.— nJT  Jeremiah  never  uses:  see  ii.  7.— PIK^J,  Jer.  xxiii.  39.— TIDID  frequently  in  Jeremiah,  xiv.  11 ;  xviii.  10, 

-T  T   T  T 

20,  etc. 

Ver.  18.— "lOiJV  See  ver.  54;  Jer.  iii.  17,  19  — fl^J.    Only  n]f  J  occurs  in  Jeremiah,  and  that  with  reference  to  time, 

duration. — ^1*77110)  Jeremiah  never  uses  :  but  see  Prov.  xi.  7  ;  Ezek.  xix.  5;  xxxvii.  11. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  10.  While  in  what  precedes  we  were  told 
how  the  sufferer  was  deprived  of  all  means  of 
escape,  what  follows  describes  the  positive 
weapons  of  offence  with  which  he  was  assaulted. 
[By  regarding  ver.  9  as  in  close  connection  with 
what  precedes,  the  introduction  of  the  bear  and 
lion  in  ver.  10  is  abrupt  and  irrelevant.  A 
prisoner,  closely  immured,  has  nothing  to  fear 
from  bears  and  lions  lurking  in  their  coverts. 
Connect  ver.  9  with  ver.  10,  however,  and  the 
sense  is  apparent.  A  traveller,  prevented  by 
barricades  and  stone  walls  from  pursuing  the 
way  he  would  go,  is  compelled  to  follow  crooked 
paths  environed  with  danger  of  encountering 
lurking  wild  beasts.  See  notes  on  ver.  9 — W. 
H.  II.] — He  -was  unto  me  as  a  bear  lying  in 
wait,  and  as  a  lion  in  secret  places.  A 
lurking  bear  tvas  he  to  me, — a  lion  in  ambuxh.  The 
image  of  a  bear  lying  in  wait  occurs  only  here. 
See,  however,  Hos.  xiii.  7,  8;  Am.  v.  19;  Prov. 
xxviii.  15.  The  figure  of  a  lion  lying  in  wait 
occurs  in  Jeremiah  xlix.  19;  1.  14;  comp.  ii.  30; 
iv.  7;  V.  6;  xii.  8.  Elsewhere,  see  Ps.  x.  9; 
xvii.  12. 

Ver.  11.  Bears  or  lions,  when  they  attack  a 
flock,  spring  upon  them,  tear  the  sheep  in  pieces 
and  leave  those  they  do  not  eat  weltering  alone 
in  their  blood.  This  last  has  happened  to  the 
Poet.  He  hath  turned  aside  my  •ways — he 
drove  me  aside.  He  hath  made  mi/  wai/.s  turn  aside 
[lit.],  that  is  to  say,  He  drives  me  from  the  right, 
direct  way.  And  pulled  me  in  pieces,  he 
hath  made  me  desolate.  He  tore  me  in  pieces 
and  cast  me  away  lonely  and  miserable.  Should  we 
translate,  He  tore  me  to  pieces,  mutilated  me,  and 
understand  this  to  mean  that  the  wild  beast  had 
eaten  his  victim,  then  this  would  not  suit  the 
other  figures  used  in  the  text.  On  this  account, 
we  must  understand  this  tearing  in  pieces  only  in 
the  sense  of  discerpere,  of  mangling,  lacerating. 
So  EwALD,  mich  zerrupfend.  The  Poet  would  say 
that  the  beast  of  prey  had  seized  one  of  the 
scattered  flock,  had  throttled  it  and  left  it  for 
dead,  lying  alone  in  its  misery.  For  we  must 
carefully  observe  the  two  ideas  expressed  here 
in  the  last  Hebrew  word,  DOIB?,  that  of  desolation, 
destruction  (see  i.  4,  1.3,  16),  and  that  of  solitari- 
ness, loncline.'is  (Is.  liv.  1  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  20).  [This 
word.  Doits',  may  express  any  object  of  suffering 


forsaken  of  God  and  men,  exciting,  therefore, 
either  pity  or  astonishment.  See  the  use  of  the 
verb  and  its  derivatives  in  ch.  i. ;  Is.  liv.  1 ;  Job 
xvi.  7;  xxi.  5;  Ps.  cxliii.  4.  The  fundamental 
signification  of  the  root  is  to  be  motionless,  filled 
with  dread.  This  is  the  idea  here.  A  solitary 
sheep,  torn  by  the  wild  beast,  lying  alone  in  its 
suffering,  and  apparently  dead.  He  made  me 
desolate,  or  a  desolation,  may  be  a  literal  transla- 
tion, but  does  not  convey  the  sense  which  can 
only  be  done  by  inventing  a  phrase,  as  Naegels- 
BACH  has  done.  The  idea  is  best  condensed,  per- 
haps, in  the  words,  He  left  me  suffering  and  aloie. 
— W.  H.  H.] 

"I^ID  cannot  be  taken  here  in  the  sense  it  al- 
ways has  elsewhere,  refractarius,  rebdlis.  The 
word  in  this  sense  is  Part.  Kal.  of  T^D,  and  oc- 

~  T 

curs  only  in  Hos.  iv.  16.  Here  it  can  only  be, 
either  Pilel  of  10  [so  Davidson],  or  Poel  of  "l^D 
(Olsh.  §  2o4).  It  is,  in  either  case,  a  verbal 
form,  occurring  no  where  except  here,  and  mean- 
ing He  made  my  ways  turn  aside,  that  is  to  say, 
he  drove  me  from  the  right,  direct  way.  Thenius 
lays  too  much  stress  on  the  word,  when  he  trans- 
lates, He  has  dragged  me  aside.  [The  idea  is,  He 
causes  me  to  diverge  from  the  way,  to  escape  the 
lurking  beast ;  but  in  vain,  for  he  springs  upon 
me,  rends  me,  and  leaves  me  weltering  in  blood. 
Blatney  gives  us  an  original  translation  of  his 
own.  "i/e  hath  turned  full  upon  me.  T^D  is  ap- 
plied, Hos.  iv.  16,  to  a  refractory  heifer,  that 
turns  aside,  and  will  not  go  forward  in  the 
straiglit  track,  as  she  is  directed.  Here  it  is  to 
be  understood  of  a  bear  or  lion  turning  aside  to- 
ward a  traveller,  to  fall  upon  him  in  his  way." 
Gerlach  understands  the  word  here  to  signify 
turning  back,  instead  of  turning  aside,  that  is, 
arresting  the  fugitive  and  sending  him  back  to 
prison.  But  neither  the  context,  nor  the  signifi- 
cation of  the  word  allow  of  this  sense.  J.\rcui, 
according  to  Gerlach,  regarded  'l^iD,  as  a  de- 
nominative from  T'ip,  spinis  opplcvit  vias  meas.  So 
Hugh  Brouohton,  My  ways  hath  He  made  thorny. 
— W.  H.  II.] 

Ver.  12.  In  a  new  figure  the  Poet  describes  the 
Lord  as  an  archer,  who  has  made  him  his  mark. 
[Henderson  :  "The  idea  of  a  hunter  was  na- 
turally suggested  by  the  circumstances  just  re- 
ferred to.  This  is  beautitully  expressed  iu  lan- 
giiatre  borrowed  from  such  employment."]  He 
hath  bent — He   bent — his    bovy. — See.    ii.   4 


CHAP.   III.  10-18. 


103 


And  set  me  as  a — the — mark  for  the  arrow^. 

The  second  half  of  the  verse  seems  to  be  an  imita- 
tion of  Job  xvi.  12. 

Ver.  13.  Continuation  of  the  figure  employed 
in  ver.  12.  He  hath  caused  the  arrow^s  of 
his  quiver  to  enter  into  my  reins. — He  shot 
into  my  reins  the  sons  of  his  quiver.  The  Lord  not 
only  aims  at  the  mark,  He  hits  it,  and  that  right 
in  the  centre.  The  reins  are  here  regarded  as 
the  central  organs,  as  frequently  with  Jeremiah 
(xi.  20  ;  xii.  2  ;  xvii.  10;  xx.  12),  not  in  a  physi- 
cal sense,  however,  but  in  a  psychological  sense, 
as  appears  from  ver.  14.  See  Delitzsch  Fsi/cho- 
logie,  §  13,  p.  268,  2d  Edition. — The  expression 
sons  of  the  quiver,  occurs  only  here.  Rosen- 
MUELLER  quotes  not  inappropriately  the  pharetra 
gravida  sagitljs  of  Horace  [Ode  I.  22,  23). 

Ver.   14.   It   happens  here  that  the  Poet  sud 
denly  loses   the  figure.     But  it  seems  as  if  he 
would  indicate  by  means  of  ver.  14,  that  by  the 
arrows  of  which  he   spoke   in   ver.  13,  he  meant 
the  arrows  of  derision.     Jeremiah  ix.  7  explicitly 

calls  the  deceitful  tongue  (no^D  ptJ^7),  a  sharpened 
arrow  {\5r\W  \r\)  See  Is.'xlix.  2.-1  was  a 
derision  to  all  my  people. — /  have  become  a 
laughing  stock  to  all  my  people.  Altogether  un- 
necessarily many  interpreters  (eveuTHEXius  and 
Ewald)  take  '5^,  my  people,  as  a  rare  plural 
form  for  D'Oj^,  peoples,  nations  (as,  it  is  asserted, 
in  2  Sam.  xxii.  44;  Ps.  cxliv.  2.  See  Ewald,  g 
177  a).  This  rests  on  the  presumption  that  tlje 
subject  of  the  Lamentation  is  not  the  Prophet, 
but  the  people  of  Israel.  We  have  already  above, 
at  vers.  1-3,  declared  ourselves  against  this  opin- 
ion, and  will  return  to  the  question  again  below, 
at  ver.  40  sqq.  [Henderson;  "Instead  of  'DJ? 
my  people,  a  considerable  number  of  MSS.  read 
D'Jp^,  and  four  D'O^H  in  the  plural;  but  this 
reading,  though  supported  by  the  Syr.,  seems  less 
suitable  than  the  former.  There  is  no  evidence 
that  the  Prophet  was  treated  otherwise  than  with 
respect  by  foreigners.  Instead  of  meeting  with 
any  consideration  from  his  countrymen,  fidelity 
in  the  discharge  of  his  duty  to  whom  had  been  the 
occasion  of  all  his  persoii.il  troubles,  he  was  made 
the  Imtt  of  their  ridicu  e,  and  the  theme  of  their 
satirie.il  songs."  See  Jer.  xx.  7.]  And  their 
song  all  the  day.  [The  conjunction  and  is  not 
in  tlie  original,  and  is  omitted  by  Naegelsbach. 
— W.  H.  H.]  The  expression,  their  song  (DTlJ'jp), 
is  from  Job  xxx.  9  ;  comp.  xii.  4  ;  Ps.  Ixix.  8-13. 
Ver.  15.  After  the  short  interruption  of  ver. 
14,  the  Poet  returns  to  the  figurative  style  of 
speaking.  He  exhausts,  as  it  were,  his  stock  of 
images,  in  order  to  depict  the  adversities  which 
befell  him.  He  must  also  receive  them  as  meat 
and  drink,  and  that  too  in  copious  measure , 
and  he  must  be  covered  with  them  as  with  ashes. 
[Scott:  Vers.  14-16.  "In  the  midst  of  his 
other  troubles,  the  prophet  was  derided  and  in- 
sulted by  the  people,  over  whose  approaching 
calamities  he  so  pathetically  mourned;  and  they 
made  him  the  subject  of  their  profane  songs,  for 
whicli  they  were  at  length  made  a  derision  uiul  a 
song  to  their  enemies.  Thus  the  Lord  filled  him 
with  bitterness  and  intoxicated  him  with  the 
nauseous  cup,  of  which  he  was  made  to  drink, 
instead    of    the   cordials  that  his   case  seemed 


to  require:  and  instead  of  nourishing,  palatable 
food,  his  bread  was  as  it  were  mixed  with  gravel, 
which  brake  his  teeth,  and  put  him  to  great  pain 
when  he  attempted  to  eat:  and  he  was  covered 
with  ashes,  as  a  constant  mourner  and  penitent."] 
— He  hath  filled  me  with  bitterness  (m.irg., 
bitternesses).  He  satiated  me  icith  bitterness.  [The 
Hebrew  verb  is  used  to  denote  satiety  after  eat- 
ing, Dent.  vi.  11;  Hosea  iv.  10.  The  connection 
seems  to  require  this  sense  here  He  was  re- 
quired to  eat  bitter  things,  or  bitter  herbs  (see 
Fuerst's  Lex.),  and  drink  ivormwood  till  he 
was  filled.— W.  H.  H.]— He  hath  made  me 
drunken  with  w^ormwood. — He  made  me 
drunk  with  [or,  made  me  drink  to  excess  o/]  worm 
wood.     See  ver.  19. 

Ver.  16.  He  hath  also  broken  [lit.  And  he 
broke.  Vers.  16-18  each,  begin  with  and  (or  vav 
conversive)  for  the  sakeof  theiniiial  letter,  which 
is  translated  here  also  It  can  be  omitted  in 
translation  altogether,  though  it  may  denote  here 
an  intimate  connection  between  this  verse  and 
ver.  15,  as  between  eating  and  drinking. — W.  H. 
H.]  My  teeth  with  gravel  stones. — He 
broke  my  teeth  ivith  pebbles.  It  is  a  matter  of  in- 
difference whether  we  regard  this  as  meaning 
bread  mixed  with  stones,  or  stones  instead  of 
bread.  He  hath  covered  me  w^ith  ashes. 
— He  covered  me  with  ashes.  The  ashes  here  seem 
to  be  intended  as  a  symbol  of  mourning,  as  they 
are  in  the  well-known  usages  of  mourning.  See 
2  Sam.  xiii.  19;  Job  ii.  8  ;  Mic.  i.  10. 

VXn,  lapillus,  a  little  stone,  occurs  besides  here 
only  in  Prov.  xx.  17  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  18).  [Prov.  xx. 
17,  "Bread  of  deceit  is  sweet  to  a  man;  but 
afterwards  his  mouth  shall  be  filled  with  gravel," 
seems  to  be  an  allusion  to  the  grit  that  often  is 
mixed  with  bread  baked  in  ashes,  and  thus  may 
explain  this  passage.  Blayney,  Boothroyd, 
Owen  and  Henderson,  translate  the  word  grit. 
Henderson's  inelegant  translation.  He  hath  made 
my  teeth  cranch  grit,  and  Ewald's  er  Hess  nieine 
Zdhne  zermalmen  Steine,  is  inconsistent  with  the 
use  of  the  preposition  3,  the  presumptive  power 
of  the  verb  D^J  (see  Gerlach),  and  the  apparent 
meaning  of  this  passage  especially  when  com- 
pared with  Prov.  XX.  17, — the  pebbles  were  not 
broken  by  the  teeth,  but  the  teeth  wer«  broken 
by  the  pebbles. — A  curious  result  of  translating 
from  a  translation  is  exhibited  in  the  Vulg.  The 
Sept.  having  rendered  this  'E^t:(3a'Afv  Tp/'/OiJ  Tovg 
dSovra^  fiov,  the  Vclo.,  taking  Tpr/cpoc;  as  calculus 
arithmeticus,  translated  Et  fregit  ad  numencm  (in 
full  number,  or  by  number,  Douay  "one  by  one") 
denies  meos. — W.  H.  11.] 

Vers.  17,  18.  These  verses  constitute  the  con- 
clusion and  culmination  point  of  the  Lamenta- 
tion. The  speaker,  dropping  the  metaphorical 
and  adopting  the  literal  style,  utters  a  threefold 
declaration.  1.  That  the  Lord  had  thrust  liim 
back,   as  it  were,  from   the  dominion  of  peace 

(0J7ty,  peace,  is  to  be  taken  in  its  broadest  sense, 
see  below).  To  this  objective  act,  what  follows 
corresponds  as -subjective.  2.  That  the  speaker 
has  been  deprived  of  all  happiness,  even  to  the 
recollection  of  it.  3.  That  he — and  this  is  the 
acme  of  his  sorrow — regarded  even  his  confidence 
and  hope  in  Jehovah  as  destroyed. 


110 


I'HE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Ver.  17.  And  thou  hast  removed  my  soul 
far  off  from  peace. — Thou  thmsledsl  away  viy 
soul  from  peace.  This  is  a  quotiition  from  Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  15,  wliich  Psalm  our  Poet  so  often  avails 
himself  of.  This  explains  why  the  Poet  so  sud- 
denly addresses  God  in  the  second  person. 
[Wordsworth:  "By  an  affecting  transition,  the 
Prophet  turns  to  the  Almighty,  whom  he  sees 
present,  and  addresses  llim,  Thou  hast  removed 
my  soul  far  off  from  peace ;  adopting  the  language 
of  another    Passion  Psalm    (^Ixxxviii.   14-18)."] 

Peace  (D)7iy)  is  happiness  In  the  widest  sense,  as 
often,  and  stands  in  parallelism  with  good  (n31£3)- 
See  Jer.  viii.  15;  xiv.  9,  "We  looked  for  peace, 
but  no  good  came."  1  forgat  prosperity 
fmarg.,  ^-ooc?). — I  forgot  good.  The  speaker  has 
been  deprived  of  all  happiness,  even  to  the  recol- 
lection of  it.  [LowTH :  "  So  Joseph  spe.aking  of 
the  seven  years  of  famine  saith  that  'plenty  shall 
\)Q  forgotten  in  the  land  of  Egypt.'  "] 

Many  old  translators  take  '^3J  as  the  subject 
of  njlj^l.  Jerome:  Expulsa  est  a  pace  anima  mea. 
Venet.  Gr.  :  'ATTfVr^^r'  a7r'  elpr/vT^r  y  eu//  ijwx>/. 
Syriac:  data  est  oblivioni  a  pace  anima  mea. 
[Calvin:  Etrevwtafuit  a  pace  anima  mea.  Brouqh- 
T0\:  and  my  soul  is  cant  off  from  peace.'\  But  these 
translations  evidently  proceed  from  philological 
ignorance.  For  rUI  is  never  used  intransitively 
(not  even  in  Hos.  viii.  5).  These  translators 
seem  also  to  have  stumbled  at  the  fact  that  here 
suddenly  God  is  addressed  in  the  second  person. 
Among  the  moderns  also,  Thenius  and  Ewald 
take  'K/£)3  as  the  subject.  But  they  take  |p  njl 
likewise  in  a  sense  it  never  has,  namely,  of  loath- 
ing. Thenius  translates,  so  that  I  loathe  happi- 
7iess.  EwALD  :  Happiness  has  become  loathsome  to 
me.  To  this  we  object,  because  no  one  ever  feels 
a  loathing  of  happiness, — nor  is  D1 7ty  equivalent 
to  life,  in  which  case  it  might  indicate  a  satiety 
or  weariness  of  life,  but  Dwty  is  the  enjoyment 
of  life.  They  have  overlooked  the  fact  that  this 
passage  is  a  quotation  from  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  15,  of 
which  our  Poet  so  often  avails  himself.  There 
it  is  said  "K/iJJ  HJrn  niri'  noS.      This  explains 

•:--:•        T    :         t  t  *^ 

why  the  Poet  so  suddenly  addresses  God  in  the 
second  person,  avA  determines  the  meaning  of 
n^T,  which  can  only  be,  as  everywhere  else,  re- 
jicere,  repelle*e.  That  nJT  is  construed  with  |D 
(as  elsevrher  ,  cmly  once,  in  Hiphil,  2  Chron.  xi. 
14)  need  ..lOt  surprise  us,  for  there  is  nothing  in 
the  word  itself  that  would  make  this  construction 
appear  as  unauthorized  or  even  strange.  [Ger- 
LACH,  while  rejecting  the  opinions  of  Thenius 
and  EwALD,  adopts  the  idea  of  the  old  transla- 
tors, Und  es  ward  verstossen  vom  Frieden  meine 
See/e.  and  strangely  appeals  to  2  Chron.  xi.  14,  to 
ju-^tify  theintransitiveuse  of  theverb. — W.  H.  H.] 
Ver.  18.  And  I  said,  My  strength  and  my 
hope  is  perished  from  the  Lord. — Over  and 
yone  from  Jehoiuih  is  my  confidence  and  hope. 
[1)UOUGHton  :  Ami  I  thought  iji  myself,  viy  state  is 
undone  and  my  hope  from  the  Eternal.  Hender- 
s.iN  :  And  I  said.  My  confidence  is  perished,  and  my 
hope  from  Jehovah.     Not  only  had  all  present  en- 


joyment been  annihilated,  but  all  prospect  of 
future  prosperity  had  been  cut  ofi"."]  The  Poet 
here  represents  the  sum  total,  as  it  were,  of  his 
punishment,  the  separate  details,  which  he  has 
been  narrating,  beginning  at  ver.  1,  being  re- 
garded as  the  several  items  of  a  sum  in  arithme- 
tic. The  result  is  an  alarming  one.  His  con- 
fidence and  his  hope  in  the  Lord  had  been  almost 
destroyed  by  the  uuiutermitied  blows  of  the  rod 
of  wrath  (vers.  1-3).  But  they  had  not  been 
actually  destroyed.  This  we  learn  from  the  ex- 
pression, and  I  said,  ^0j<^.     Without  this  word 

T   It 

ver.  18  would  have  a  much  more  equivocal  sense. 
But  this  indicates  that  the  Poet  would  represent 
the  loss  of  his  confidence,  not  as  an  actual  fact 
(else  he  would  have  said  'IJX]'^),  but  as  merely  an 
anticipatory  thought.  He  said,  i.  e.,  he  thought 
so  to  himself,  as  in  Jer.  iii.  7,  "IDS^I  represents 
merely  a  speaking  to  one's  self,  /.  e  ,  a  thought,  a 
feeling.  [See  instances  of  this  use  of  the  expres- 
sion in  Gen.  xxvi.  9;  1  Sam.  xx.  3;  2  Sam. 
xxi.  16;  1  Kings  viii.  12,  etc.—Vf.  H.  H.]  That 
he  had  not  actually  lost  his  confidence  is,  finally, 
most  apparent  from  what  follows,  where  the  Poet, 
with  all  his  soul's  energy,  refastens  the  bond  of 
confidence  that  had  threatened  to  break.  [Henry: 
"  Without  doubt  it  was  his  infirmity  to  say  thus, 
Ps.  Ixxvii.  10,  for  with  God  there  is  everlasting 
strength,  and  He  is  His  people's  never  failing 
hope,  whatever  they  may  think."] 

n^X  followed  by  |D,  has  different  senses.  This 
JD  often  indicates  the  person  or  place  suffering 
the  loss;  ^I'B'O  DUO  H^N;    Ps.    cxlii.   5;    comp. 

•  V    •  T  -  T 

Job  xi.  20;  xviii.  17;  Jer.  xviii.  18;  xxv.  35; 
xlix.  7,  38,  etc.  It  can  be  taken  thus  here.  For 
the  thought  that  Jehovah  has  lost  the  confidence 
of  the  Poet,  can  be  expressed  in  the  form  here 
used.  Yet  it  is  well  to  observe  here  that  the 
words  cannot  be  translated,  my  confidence  and 
my  hope  in  Jehovah  are  lost  [as  Noyes  does]. 
For  the  object  of  confidence  is  always  indicated 

by  3,  b^,  Sx,  or,  as  especially  after  ri^ntn,  Ps. 
xxxix.  8,  by  /.  But  the  sense  is,  my  confidence 
is  perished  away  from  Jehovah,  it  has  lost  its 
direction  towards  Him.  It  is  a  constriu-tio  prseg- 
nans:  my  confidence  is  turned  away  from  God, 
and  thus  has  become  destroyed.  JD  could  also 
be  taken  with  reference  to  the  efi&cient  cause.  See 
n3K'  mbx  nOE/jp,  Job  iv.  9 ;  Ps.  Ixxx.  17.  [So 
Blayney  and  Boothroyd:  Jehovah  hath  caused  my 
strength  and  my  hope  tofail.']  Yet,  if  [D  had  only 
this  sense,  and  not  at  the  same  time  the  local 
sense  of  away  from,  we  would  rather  expect  'J3p» 

as  we  readPs.  Ixviii.  3,  D'rih»X  'JSD  D'j;t^-l  n3X\ 
— nVJ.  That  this  root  contains  the  ideas  of 
splendor,  strength  and  endurance,  is  certain. 
Which  is  its  original  meaning  is  disputed.  Here, 
as  in  1  Sam.  v.  29,  the  idea  seems  to  be  strength 
with  the  modification  of  perseverance,  persever- 
ing steadfastness  and  confidence.     At  least  this 

best  suits  the  intimately  connected  word  'flyllin. 


CHAP.   III.  19-42.  Ill 


PART  n. 

in.  19-42. 

y  Ver.  19.  Remember  my  affliction  and  my  wandering, 

The  wormwood  and  the  gall, 
f  Ver.  20.  Yea,  Thou  wilt  indeed  remember 

That  my  soul  is  bowed  down  in  me. 
\  Ver.  21.  This  will  I  take  to  my  heart, 

Therefore  will  I  hope. 

n  Ver.  22.  Because  of  Jehovah's  mercies,  we  are  not  consumed; 

For  His  compassions  fail  not : 
n  Ver.  23.  They  are  new  every  morning : 

Great  is  Thy  faithfulness. 
n  Ver.  24.  My  portion  is  Jehovah,  saith  my  soul ; 

Therefore  will  I  hope  in  Him. 
to  Ver.  25.  Good  is  Jehovah  to  them  that  wait  for  Him, 

To  the  soul  that  seeketh  Him. 
0  Ver.  26.  Good  is  it  both  to  hope  and  silently  wait 

For  the  salvation  of  Jehovah. 
0  Ver.  27.  Good  is  it  for  a  man, 

That  he  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth. 
'>  Ver.  28.  He  sitteth  alone  and  is  silent. 

Because  He  imposed  it  upon  him: 
f  Ver.  29.  He  putteth  his  mouth  in  the  dust, 

Peradventure,  there  may  be  hope! 
♦  Ver.  30.  He  offereth  his  cheek  to  him  that  smiteth  him ; 

He  is  filled  with  reproach. 

2  Ver.  31.  For  the  Lord  will  not  cast  off 

Forever ! 

3  Ver.  32.  For  though  He  hath  caused  grief. 

Yet  is  He  moved  to  compassion  according  to  His  great  mercft 
D  Ver.  33.  For  He  doth  not  willingly  afflict 
.  And  grieve  the  children  of  men. 

7  Ver.  34.  To  trample  under  his  feet 
.  All  prisoners  of  the  earth, — 

7  Ver.  35.  To  deprive  a  man  of  his  rights 
.  Before  the  face  of  the  Most  High, — 

7  Ver.  36.  To  subvert  a  man  in  his  cause, — 

The  Lord  approveth  not ! 
0  Ver.  37.  Who  is  he  that  spoke  and  it  was  done, 

Except  the  Lord  commanded  ? 
Q  Ver.  38.  Cometh  not  the  evil  as  well  as  the  good 

From  the  mouth  of  the  Most  High  ? 
0  Ver.  39.  Why  murmur  living  men — 

Every  one  for  his  sins  ? 

J   Ver.  40.  Let  us  search  and  try  our  ways, 

And  return  to  Jehovah. 
J    Ver.  41.  Let  us  lift  up  our  heart  together  with  our  hands 

To  God  in  the  Heavens. 
J    Ver.  42.  We — have  sinned  and  rebelled. 

Thou — hast  not  pardoned. 


312 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


ANALYSIS. 

In  the  second  part,  vers.  19-42,  the  Poet  rises  out  of  the  night  of  sorrow  into  the  clear  day  of  comfort  and 
hope;  yet  he  allows,  as  it  were,  a  morning  dawn  to  precede,  and  an  evening  twilight  to  follow  this  day. 
Vers.  19-21  contain  a  transition.  The  Poet  can  again  pray  !  He  prays  the  Lord  to  be  once  more 
mindful  of  him,  vers.  19,  20;  and  on  his  own  part  he  sets  about  to  seek  for  grounds  of  comfort,  ver. 
21.  These  he  finds,  first  of  all,  in  the  fact  that  Israel  is  not  completely  destroyed,  that  there  is  yet  a 
remnant,  as  a  starting  point  for  a  return  to  the  belter  fortune  which  is  notv  at  hand.  This  fact  is  due 
to  the  grace  and  mercy  of  God,  the  continuation  of  which  the  Poet  recognizes  with  the  deepest  joy,  vers. 
22-24.  From,  this  point  of  view,  afforded  by  the  Divine  mercy,  the  Poet  now  looks  upon  his  sorroivs  : 
— the  Lord  even  when  He  smites,  always  means  it  for  good,  vers.  25-27; — if  it  be  borne  patiently, 
with  silent  submission,  vers.  28-30, — then  the  rays  of  Divine  compassion  will  again  appear,  vers.  31- 
33.  Vieived from  this  stand-point,  every  sorrow,  even  that  inflicted  upon  us  by  human  malignity,  seems 
a  wholesome  divine  ordinance, — so  that  not  the  sorroio  itself,  but  only  the  .tin  that  caused  it.  is  to  be 
deplored,  vers.  34-39.  Such  a  lamentation  for  sin,  the  cause  of  the  affliction  suffered,  the  Poet  note 
begins,  not  in  his  own  name,  but  in  that  of  all  the  people,  vers.  40-42.  And  as  he  had  skilfully  in- 
troduced this  lamentation  by  the  self-accusation  in  ver.  39,  so  these  three  verses,  40-42,  serve  him  as  a 
means  of  transition  to  a  new  lamentation  over  the  misfortunes  that  had  befallen  the  nation.      With  the 

words  prijD  Xv,  Thou  hast  not  pardoned,  ver.  42,  he  turns  to  the  description  of  the  common  mis- 
fortune. 

with  similar  words.     Thus  vers.  25-27  begin  with 

a'lD,  vers.  28-30  with  the  Imperfects  2^\  ]r\\  {n\ 
vers.  31-33  with  ''2,  vers.  34-36  with  7  before  an 
Infinitive,  and  vers.  37-39  are  interrogative  sen- 
tences. It  should  also  be  observed  that  from  ver. 
22  the  Poet  no  longer  speaks  in  the  first  person 
singular.  It  is  as  if  he  felt  the  necessity,  at  this 
culmination  point  of  the  Poem,  of  letting  the  in- 
dividual step  back  behind  the  sublime  and  uni^ 
versal  truth  which  he  pronounces. 


PRELIMINARY    NOTE. 

In  this  eminently  consolatory  passage,  vers. 
19-42,  with  its  introduction,  vers.  19-21,  and  con- 
clusion, vers.  40-42,  every  triad  of  verses  consti- 
tutes, as  regards  sense,  a  complete  whole.  The 
etfect  of  similarity  of  construction  is  further 
heightened  in  vers.  25-39,  by  the  fact  that  the 
triplets  of  each  verse  begin,  not  only  with  the 
same  initial  letter,  but  with  the  same  word,  or 


m.  19-21. 


19       Remembering  mine  affliction    and  my  misery,  the  wormwood   and  the   gall. 
20,  21  My  soul  hath  them  still  in  remembrance,  and  is  humble  in  me.     This  I  recall 
to  my  mind,  therefore  have  I  hope. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  19.— 'Jj;.  See  remarks  i.  3. — ''ino'l.  see  i.  7.  [Gerlach  translates  it  expulsion,  exile,  verstossuug.  Blaynet, 
BooTHBOTD,  Oven  ■  abasement.    Henderson  :  persecution.    Broughton  :  vexation.]— 'H}^^!,  see  ver.  15. — E^N^i  see  ver.  5. 

T-:|- 

Ver.  20.— iJx^  .cio  n^U?  occurs,  except  here,  only  in  Ps.  xliv.  26 ;  Prov.  ii.  18.  The  root  PI' li?  is  nowliere  found. — 
n'IS'ni-  To  take  1  in  the  sense  of  quod  (Rosenmceller,  Vaihinger,  Enqelhardt),  is  an  arbitrary  rendering  that  receives 
no  support  from  the  reference  to  Gen.  xxx.  27. 

Ver.  21.— The  expression  3S~Sn  yWH,  to  take  something  to  heart,  is  never  found  in  Jeremiah  :  see  Deut.  iv.  36  ;  xxx. 

1 ;  Is.  xliv.  19 ;  xlvi.  8 ;  1  Kings  viii.  47.— S'TliX-    See  Jer.  iv.  19.    The  anomalous  form  there  found,  D /imX,  's  traced 

back  to  Hn  or   rr\,  but  7n'  in  no  form  occurs  in  Jeremiah ;  therefore  here  again  a  difference  in  the  use  of  language  is 

apparent.     Forms  of  SlT  occur  in  Lamentations  only  in  this  chapter,  namely,  verb  forms  in  vers.  21,  24,  noun  forms  in 

vers.  18,  26.    [If  Jeremiah  could  coin  an  entirely  new  word  in  his  prophecies  and  use  it  only  once,  we  might  allow  him  to 
introduce  into  the  Lamentations  words  already  coined  and  familiar  to  him  in  other  Scriptures,  even  if  he  confine  this  use  to 

one  place  or  one  chapter.— W.  H.  H.]— 13-^^'  has  its  usual  signification,  therefore,  for  that  reason. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

The  artistic  management  of  the  composition 
should  be  here  observed.  The  whole  preceding 
recital  from  ver.  1,  constitutes  a  crescendo  move- 
ment, which  ends  in  ver.  18  with  a  shrill  dis- 
sonance, enhanced  by  (he  fac*  tliat  it  closes  with 
the  name  o."  .Jehovah,  here  mentioned  for  tlie  first 
time.  But  tins  dissonance,  after  ver.  21,  is  lost 
in  the  most  agreeable  harmony.  The  three  in- 
tervening verses,  19-21,  constitute  the  transition 
from  discord  to  harmony. 


Vers.  19,  20.  As  if  shocked  that  so  terrible  a 
thought  could  come  into  his  mind,  the  Poet  rouses 
himself  up  and  directs  a  cry  of  anguish  from  the 
depths  of  his  heart  to  the  Lord,  that  He  would 
not  forget  and  reject  him,  but  would  graciously 
remember  him.  [Gerlach:  "The  prophet  is 
certain,  that  if  God  will  only  be  rightly  mindful 
of  the  misery  poured  out  over  him.  His  pity  must 
be  excited  (Vaih.),  and  this  certainly  is  immedi- 
ately expressed  with  assurance  in  ver.  20.'"] 

Ver.  I'.t.  Remembering  mine  affliction 
and  my  misery,  the  w^ormwood  and  the 
gall. — Remember  [so  E.  V.,  margi?i,  all  the  English 


CHAP.  III.  19-21. 


113 


versions  except  Blatnet,  the  Taro.,  Vulg.,  and 
Str.]  my  affliction  and  my  wanderings  (see  i.  7), 
wormwood  and y all !  The  Poet  thus  represents  to 
the  Lord  the  most  striking  features  of  his  suffer- 
ings as  depicted  in  the  preceding  verses.  [The 
repetition  of  the  three  emphatic  words,  in  which 
the  idea  of  misei-y  is  condensed,  ''JJ^  affliction  or 
misery,  ver.  1,  nJJ^  /  wormwood,  ver.  15,  K'X'l  gall 
or  bitterness,  ver.  15,  shows  that  this  verse  is  a 
brief  and  emphatic  recapitulation  of  the  whole 
preceding  description.  But  with  all  these  in  view, 
the  Prophet  rejects  the  thought  he  was  tempted 
to  indulge,  as  expressed  in  ver.  18,  and  "  does 
not  let  go  his  hold  on  the  God  of  his  life  ;  but  is 
convinced  that  if  He  will  only  regard  him,  all 
will  be  well  "  (Henderson). — W.  H.  H.] 

Many  interpreters  stumble  at  the  fact  that  the 
Poet,  immediately  after  the  cry  of  despair  in  ver. 

18,  should  again  address  a  prayer  to  Jehovah. 
Many,  therefore,  (Bottcher,  Thenius)  take  IJT 
and  *li3Tn  "lOI,  ver.  20,  as  the  subject  of  a  hypo- 
thetical proposition,  Remember  my  misery  .  .  . 
yea,  my  soul  remembers  it  and  hinnblet  itself  in  me. 
[E.  V. :  Remembering  mine  affliction  .  .  .  My  soul 
hath  them  still  in  remembrance  and  is  humbled  in  7?ie.] 
But  to  take  the  Inf.  Constr.  131  in  a  finite  sense, 
is  altogether  ungrammatical  and  without  pre- 
cedent. EwALD,  indeed,  takes  "ijl  as  an  Impera- 
tive, but  as  an  address  "  to  the  first  best  hearer." 
He  also  takes  li3rr\,  ver.  20,  for  the  third  person 
feminine,  My  soul,  holds  up  before  itself  [remem- 
bers with  self-reproach],  it  humbles  itself  in  me. 
It  seems  to  me  that  all  these  interpreters  exag- 
gerate the  suddenness  of  the  transition  from  the 
cry  of  ver.  18  to  the  prayer  of  ver.  19,  and  do  not 
rightly  apprehend  it.  They  overlook  the  soften- 
ing effect  of  1D^^  and  I  said  \_i.  e.,  to  myself], 
and  they  fail  to  observe  that  the  prayer  immedi- 
ately following  in  ver.  19,  plainly  shows  that  the 
language  of  ver.  18  was  the  expression  of  a  rash 
but  conquered  moment  of  despair.  Thus  the 
Poet,  by  the  fact  that  he  can  again  pray  in  this 
way,  plainly  gives  us  to  understand  that  his 
despair  had  secured  no  strong  foot-hold  in  his 
breast.  Some  regard  ll^Iil,  ver.  20,  as  the 
second  person  masculine  indeed,  but  in  the  Indi- 
cative sense, — truly  thou  tliinkest  thereon, — indi- 
cating the  hearing  of  the  prayer  uttered  in  ver. 

19.  But  in  that  case  the  sentence  should  not  be 
continued  with  the  Imperfect.  It  should  have 
been,  0  nnt^'l.  See  my  Gr.,  g  84,  n.  f.  ["The 
perfect  is  used  to  denote  a  fact  which  can  only 
be  repiesented  as  accomplished  in  actual  reality, 
but  which  happens,  as  respects  time,  intheiraniedi- 
ate,  unconditioned  future."  Naegelsbach's  Gr.] 

We  not  only  regnrd  IDT  as  a  prayer  directed  to 
the  Lord,  but  "llSJi^,  ver.  20,  as  an  emphatic 
repetition  of  it.  [Some  old  commentators  trans- 
lated "IJT  as  the  Inf.,  but  regarded  ver.  19,  as  in 
close  connection  with  ver.  18.  See  Muenster: 
Secundam  quosdam  est  T1DI  infinit.,  ut  sit  sensus: 
per  tit  spes  mea,  recordante  me  afflictionis  mese  (Ger- 
lach).  The  interpretation  of  this  verse  must  be 
determined  by  the  gender  and  person,  or  subject 
of  -l13in  iu  ver.  20.— W.  H.  H.] 


Ver.  20.  My  soul  hath  them  still  in  re- 
membrance, and  is  humbled  in  me. — Re- 

member,  yea  remember,  that  my  soul  composes  itself 
in  me.*  [Lit.  Remembering  Thou  wilt  remember,  i.  e., 
according  to  the  familiar  Hebrew  idiom.  Thou 
ivilt  certainly  remember.  CranmerBib.:  Yea  thou 
shall  remember  them  ;  for  my  soul  melteth  away  in 
me.  Owen  :  Remembering  thou  wilt  remember  them, 
for  botved  down  within  me  is  my  soul.  Noyes  :  Yea, 
thou  ivilt  remember  them,  for  my  soul  is  bowed  down 
within  me.  Gerlach:  Remembering  Thou  wilt  in- 
deed remember  that  my  soul  is  bowed  down  ivithin 
me.  The  last  is  undoubtedly  most  literal  and 
exact. — W.  H.  H.] — After  the  prayer,  so  em- 
phatically repeated.  Remember,  Oh  do  Thou  remem- 
ber, what  immediately  follows  can  only  indicate 
something  favorable, — that  my  soul  comjjoses  itself 
in  me.  The  meaning  of  the  verb  T\W  (see  also 
T\X\W  and  T\T\f^)  can  only  be  sedere,  desidere,  [to 
sit,  sink  or  settle  down"^.  The  Kal  in  Ps.  xliv.  26, 
is  evidently  taken  in  a  bad  sense,   "For  our  soul 

is  bowed  down  to  the  dust,"  ^lil^B}  '^2yh  r\r\^. 

•■  :  -         TT    V  T  T 

The  Hiphil  (for  there  is  no  apparent  reason  for 
forsaking  the  K'tib)  is  to  be  taken  either  in  the 
indirect  causative  sense,  denoting  to  cause  that 
something  sinks,  sits  down,  or  in  direct  causative 
sense,  to  cause  sinking,  to  sink  one's  self,  to  sit  down. 
Since,  according  to  what  precedes,  the  Poet's  soul 
had  been  excited  in  the  highest  degree,  furiously 
agitated  (see  "l?^pn,  i.  20;  ii.  11),  the  meaning 
to  sink  itself,  sit  down,  become  calm,  would  be  ad- 
mirably appropriate  here,  and  the  more  so  be- 
cause, according  to  what  precedes,  the  Poet  had 
brought  reproach  upon  his  soul,  by  an  ebullition 
of  feeling  of  an  unjustifiable  kind,  and  bordering 
upon  defiance.  It  is  certainly  seemly  for  such  a 
soul  to  sink  down,  as  it  were,  into  itself,  and  to 
become  still,  as  the  ocean  returning  to  rest  after  a 

furious  storm.  The  expression  in  me,  v^,  ia 
used  here  as  in  Ps.  xlii.  5,  6,  7,  12 ;  xliii.  5  ; 
cxxxi.  2 ;  cxlii.  4 ;  Jer.  viii.  18,  etc.  See  De- 
LiTzscH  Psych.,  IV.,  §  1,  pp.  151,  152.  There 
lies  in  it  the  idea  of  heaviness,  as  if  the  heart  felt 
burdened.  [Wordsworth:  '' My  soul  *** sinks 
down  upon  me.  The  soul  (Hebr.  nephesh)  is  the 
seat  of  the  agitated  affections,  and  it  sinks  down, 
as  it  were,  in  a  swoon,  upon  the  Spirit  (Hebr. 
rudch),  the  diviner  faculty,  and  overwhelms  it. 
Comp.  Ps.  xlii.  4-6 ;  xliv.  25 ;  Ixxvii.  3 ;  cxlii. 
3." — The  commentators  have  succeeded  in  ob- 
scuring the  meaning  of  this  verse,  by  many  possi- 
ble or  impossible  translations,  for  which  the  curi- 
ous may  safely  consult  Gerlach,  but  the  real  mean- 
ing is  expressed  by  the  most  natural  translation  of 
the  words.  Remembering  Thou  wilt  remember,  i.  e.. 
Thou  wilt  surely  remember,  that  my  soul  sinks  within 
me,  or  is  boived  down  in  me,  or  upon  me  (literally,  ac- 
cording both  to  Naegelsbach  and  Wordsworth  ), 
i.  e.,  is  humbled  in  penitence  and  overwhelmed 
with  sorrow.     So  Gerlach. — W.  H.  H,] 

Ver.  21.  This  I  recall  to  my  mind  (marg., 
make  to  return  to  my  heart),  therefore   have  I 

*  [Wordsworth  mistranslates  N.iEGELSBACH, — Rememhir, 
remember  Tliou,  that  my  soul  sinks  wWiin  inc.  Gedenke,  jv 
gudoiike,  Dass  lueiue  Seele  sicli  beruhige  in  mir.  Sir'i 
berulugrn  means  to  quiet,  compose  one's  self.  Besitk-.-;,  his 
note.s  explain  the  Hebrew  in  the  sense  of  sinking  down  into 
a  state  of  list  afttr  great  agitation. — W.  H.  U.j 


il4 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


hope. — This  will  I  take  to  my  heart,  on  this  account 
will  I  hope.  The  effect  of  the  soul's  becoming 
Biibraissive  and  acquiescent  is,  that  it  now  again 
takes  lo  heart  those  facts  which,  notwithstanding 
all  iiardships  endured  at  the  hand  of  the  Lord, 
yet  always  encourage  the  exercise  of  confidence 
in  Him.  This  (Hli)  cannot  refer  to  what  pre- 
cedes. Still  less  can  therefore  (J3~7^),  of  the 
second  clause.  For  what  precedes  is  only  a 
prayer,  Avith  no  positive  promise.  Ver.  21  is  the 
immediate  introduction  to  the  impressive  con- 
solatoi-y  section  which  begins  with  ver.  22.  It 
is  shown  in  what  follows,  why  the  Poet  still 
clierishes  hope.  See  the  conclusion  of  ver.  24, 
therefore  ivill  I  hope  in  Him.  [The  awkward  re- 
ference of  the  this  and  therefore  of  ver.  21,  to  what 
follows,  which  is  rendered  necessary  by  the 
translation  of  ver.  20,  adopted  by  Naegelsbach 
and  others,  is  a  strong  argument  against  the  cor- 
rectness of  that  translation.  1.  The  position  of 
the  this,  as  the  first  word  of  the  sentence, 
strengthens  the  likelihood  that  it  refers  to  some- 
thing just  stated,  rather  than  to  something  about 
to  be  stated.  If  we  explain  its  position  iu  the 
sentence  by  the  necessity  of  the  proper  initial 
letter,  this  may  show  how  much  the  style  is  af- 
fected by  the  artificial  structure  of  the  poem,  and 
greatly  weakens  the  argument  of  those  who  ima- 
gine they  discover  differences  between  the  style 
of  the  Lamentations,  and  of  Jeremiah's  Pro- 
phecies. But  2.  The  this  and  therefore,  if  they  re- 
fer to  what  follows,  lead  us  to  expect  an  imme- 
diate, clear  and  definite  proposition,  to  which 
they  would  logically  correspond.  But  there  is 
no  such  proposition  stated,  but  certain  general 
truths  follow,  which  only  remotely  and  by  a  men- 
tal process  of  our  own  minds,  can  be  made  to 
satisfy  the  requirements  of  the  this  and  therefore 
in  ver.  21.  3.  The  attempt  to  establish  a  con- 
nection between  the  therefore  I  hope  in  ver.  21, 


and  the  same  expression  at  the  end  of  ver.  24,  as 
if  one  were  an  index  finger  pointing  forward, 
and  the  other  an  index  finger  pointing  backward, 
showing  that  all  that  lies  between  them  is  the 
this,  on  account  of  which  the  prophet  says  there- 
fore I  hope,  is  open  to  the  following  objections. 
(«)  The  therefore  of  ver.  24,  can  only  logically  re- 
fer to  the  words  immediately  preceding,  "  Je- 
hovah is  my  portion,  saith  my  soul."  (6)  The 
therefore,  in  ver.  24,  ia  restricted  to  what  imme- 
diately precedes  by  the  addition  of  the  words 
"  in  Him."  If  it  had  been  intended  to  correspond 
with  and  explain  the  declaration  of  ver.  21,  it 
should  have  been  "therefore  I  hope  in  this,''  i.  e., 
in  the  doctrine  contained  in  all  the  preceding 
verses,  to  which  the  this  of  ver.  21  refers,  (c) 
The  fact  that  there  is  as  much  in  the  verses  im- 
mediately following  ver.  24,  as  in  those  im- 
mediately preceding  it,  to  afford  hope  and  com- 
fort, makes  it  exceedingly  improbable  that  ver. 
24  terminates  a  section  begun  in  ver.  21.  [d)  If 
the  therefore,  of  ver.  24,  refers  to  a  proposition 
preceding  and  not  following  it,  it  is  likely  that 
the  therefore  of  ver.  21  does  also.  4.  The  trans- 
lation of  ver.  20,  as  Cranmer's  Bible,  Owen  and 
NoYES  translate  it  (see  above  on  ver.  20),  or  as 
Rosenmueller  translates  it  [Enim  vero  reminis- 
ceris,  hoc  animo  meo  medilor),  and  still  more  as 
(jrERLACH  translates  it.  Thou  wilt  certainly  remem- 
ber that  my  soul  is  bowed  down  in  me,  or  upon  me, 
renders  the  meaning  of  ver.  21  clear  and  un- 
equivocal. This  assurance,  that  God  is  mindful 
of  the  soul  that  is  bowed  down  upon  itself,  in 
sorrow  and  penitence,  the  Prophet  takes  to  heart, 
and  therefore  hope  revives  in  his  bosom.  We 
thus  have  a  graceful  and  easy  introduction  to 
the  beautiful  passage  that  follows  in  which  the 
thought  expressed  in  ver.  20,  that  God  is  mindful 
of  the  submissive  patient  sufferer,  is  expanded 
and  reappears  at  every  point. — W.  H.  H.] 


III.  22-24. 


22       It  is  of  the  Lord's  mercies  that  we  are  not  consumed,  because  his  compassions 
23,  24  fail  not.      They  are  new  every  morning :  great  is  thy  faithfulness.     The  Lord 
is  my  portion,  saith  my  soul ;  therefore  will  I  hope  in  him. 


TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  22.— rnon.    Gerlach  argues  that  the  use  in  Jer.  xliv.  of  ^JDH,  in  ver.  18,  for  the  first  person  plural,  and  of  ^Ofl, 
:  |T  :  T 

in  vers.  12,  27,  for  tlie  third   i)or8on  plural,  is  decisive  evidence  of  the  Jeremiac  use  of  language  in  the  Lamentations. — W. 
H.  H.]— The  plural  O'lOn,  "ot  found  in  Jeremiah,  is  frequent  elsewhere,  ver.  31  ;  Gen.  xxxii.   11  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  7  ;   Ps.  Ixxix. 

2;  cvii.  43,  eic— D'OH^,  Jer.  xvi.  5;  xlii.  12.-^^2,  Jer.  viii.  20;  xiv.  6;  xvi.  4,  etc. 

Ver.  23.— D'lr'in  is  in  apposition  to  l^m  — l^lfl,  Jer.  xxxi.  22,  31.— D'TpaS,  Is.  xxxiii.  2;  Ps.  Ixxiii.  14;  ci.  8. 
•  T-:  T-:  |-  TT  •  It  :  - 

Jeremiah  nses  TpiS  in  this  sense  only  once.— nj^OX,  Jer.v.l,  3;  vii.  28;  ix.  2. 

Ver.  24.— The"expression  'C'SJ   iTlDX  occurs  only  here.— 1^.    This  construction  with  ^  occurs,  Ps.  xxxviii.  16;  xlii. 
•  :  -        T  :  |T 
6, 12 ;  xliii.  6 ;  Mic.  vii.  V,  etc. 

stitutes   the   middle  portion   both   of  the   third 

chapter  and  of  the  whole  book.     For  as  chapter 

EXEQETICAL   AND   CRITICAL.  ^j^j^.j  gg^^^piyy  t^e  middle   place   among  the  five 

Vers.  22-24.  It  should  be  especially  observed  Songs,  so  the  two  decades  of  verses,  vers.  22-42, 
here  that  the  passage  which  is  full  of  the  richest  constitute  almost  exactly  the  middle  part  of  chap- 
tomfort  and   which  includes   vers.  22-42,  con-    ter  third.     Here  the  author  skilfully  introduces 


CHAP.  III.  22-24. 


115 


the  sunshine.  He  permits  the  bright  day  of 
hope  and  resignation  to  follow  the  night  of  despair 
described  in  ver.  18.  Immediately  following 
these  verses,  however,  the  misery  of  the  people 
and  of  the  Prophet  is  again,  depicted  in  the 
gloomiest  colors,  so  that  this  bright  part  is,  as  it 
were,  framed  in  on  both  sides  with  deep  dark- 
ness, which  serves  as  a  back-ground  to  make  the 
colors  of  this  picture  of  consolation  stand  out  with 
greater  distinctness.  And  so,  as  it  were,  the 
dome  of  the  building,  artistically  constructed  of 
these  toarfnl  Sougs,  rises  up  as  a  pyramid  of 
light  out  of  painful  darkness,  by  which  means 
the  comforting  truth,  that  for  believers  the 
sun  of  happiness  will  at  last  triumph  over  the 
night  of  misery  and  suffering,  is  placed  con- 
sjiicuously  in  the  clearest  and  strongest  light. 
First  of  all  the  joyful  announcement  is  made, 
vers.  22-24,  that,  by  the  grace  of  God,  Israel  is 
not  yet  completely  undone.  There  is  still  a 
remnant  which  can  serve  as  a  connecting  link 
for  the  new  order  of  things.  This  great  favor 
Israel  owes  to  the  mercy  of  God,  which  is  not  yet 
exhausted,  but  rather  in  consequence  of  it  the 
faithfulness  of  God  renews  itself  every  morning, 
so  that  the  Poet  can  proclaim  with  assurance,  as 
a  noble  anchor  of  hope  and  consolation,  that  the 
Lord  is  his  portion,  and  that  be  may  still  say  to 
his  God  "  Thou  art  mine." 

Ver.  22.  It  is  of  the  LORD'S  mercies  that 
we  are  not  consumed,  because  his  com- 
passions fail  not. — -Because  of  Jehovah's  mercies 
we  are  not  consumed  [Gnaden  Jehovah's  sind  es, 
dass  wir  nicht  gar  aus  sind.  So  also,  word  for 
word,  Gerlach],  for  his  compassion  has  no  end. 
[The  E.  V.  is  more  accurate,  because  his  compas- 
sions fail  not. — AV.  H.  H.]  The  fact  that  the  Poet 
here  speaks  in  the  first  person  plural,  when  else- 
where, down  to  ver.  40,  he  speaks  only  of  him- 
self, is  explained  by  what  has  been  already  shown, 
that  he  fastens  the  cords  of  his  own  personal 
hope  to  the  fact  that  the  people  still  exists,  even 
if  only  as  a  weak  remnant.  But  that  even  sucli 
a  kernel  remains,  he  ascribes  to  the  grace  of  God. 
[See  these  transitions  from  singular  to  plural 
and  back  again,  explained  in  remarks  intro- 
ductory to  the  chapter.]  The  use  of  the  plural  in 
mercies  involves  the  idea  of  manifestations  of 
grace,  or  illustrations  of  grace,  in  the  way  of 
instruction  and  of  example.  Many  acts  of  Di- 
vine grace  shown  to  many  individuals,  combine 
in  the  result.  Since  the  mercies  (the  several  acts 
of  grace)  of  Jehovah  can  only  be  regarded  as  the 
efiiuence  of  His  compassion,  we  take  the  second  '3 
as  a  causative  particle,  ^^for  His  compassion  has 
no  end."  The  compassion  of  God  is  the  ground 
of  His  graciousness,  in  consequence  of  which  Is- 
rael is  not  entirely  undone. 

If  we  could  take  OOH  for  the  third  person 
plural,   as    the  Chaldaic,   Stbiac    and    manj 


moderns  do  (Ewald,  Thenids,  Delitzch  on  Is. 
xxiii.  11),  the  sense  of  this  place  would  be  en- 
tirely clear.  [We  could  then  translate  with  Cal- 
vin, The  mercies  of  Jehovah  !  surely  they  are  not 
consumed.  In  which  Owen,  Blaynet  and  BooTH- 
ROYD  substantially  agree. — W.  H.  H.]  But, 
notwithstanding  the  fact  that  in  Ps.  Ixiv.  7, 
UpD  seems  even  more  plainly  than  here  as  if  it 
must  be  taken  for  the  third  person  plural  [not 
necessarily.  See  J.  A.  Alexander  in  loc.'\,  yet 
Olshausen  is  certainly  right  when  he  shows,  | 
82  u.  that  the  insertion  of  3  as  a  compensation 
for  the  reduplication  of  the  consonant,  is  in  vio- 
lation of  all  the  established  rules  of  Grammar. 
It  may  be  that  at  several  of  those  doubtful  places 
that  are  referred  to  (Is.  xxiii.  11  ;  Lam.  iii.  22  ; 
Ps.  Ixiv.  7;  Prov.  xxvi.  7;  Ezr.  x.  16)  false 
readings  have  slipped  in.  But  here  this  suppo- 
sition is  unnecessary.  Here  as  in  Num.  xvii.  28, 
and  Jer.  xliv.  18.  ^JOn  is  the  first  person  plural. 

Ver.  23.  They  are  new  every  morning. 
[They,  i.  e.,  the  mercies  of  Jehovah,  which  are  ever 
renewed  because  His  compassion  fails  not:  for  His 
mercies  are  the  fruit  of  His  conipasson  (see  notes 
on  ver.  22).— W.  H.  H.]— Great  is  thy  faith- 
fulness.— Faithfulness  is  only  a  form  of  compas- 
sionate love.  It  is  love  enduring  In  all  circum- 
stances. [Calvin:  "  Were  God  to  take  away  the 
promise,  all  the  miserable  would  inevitably  per- 
ish; for  they  can  never  lay  hold  on  His  mercy 
except  through  His  word.  This,  then,  is  the 
reason  why  Scripture  so  often  connects  these 
two  things  together,  even  God's  mercy  and  His 
faithfulness  in  fulfilling  His  promises."] 

Ver.  24.  Vers.  22,23,  treated  only  of  objective 
facts.  From  these  a  subjective  conclusion  is 
now  drawn.  Since  the  Lord  is  so  gracious, 
merciful  and  faithful,  the  Poet  esteems  Him  as 
the  dearest  treasure  of  his  soul,  as  his  best  por- 
tion, and  the  foundation  of  his  hope.  The 
LORD  is  my  portion. — My  portion  is  Jehovah. 
This  seems  to  refer  to  Num.  xviii.  20,  where  the 
Lord,  having  told  Aaron  that  he  should  receive 
no  hereditary  portion  in  the  land,  says  to  him, 
"  I  am  thy  part  l^portion']  and  thine  inheritance." 
The  same  expression  is  found  in  Ps.  xvi.  5;  Ixxiii. 
26;  cxix.  57;  cxlii.  6.  See  Jer.  x.  16;  li.  19; 
Deut.  xxxii.  9.  Saith  my  soul. — [Calvin  : 
"He  speaks  emphatically,  that  his  soul  had  thus 
said  .  .  .  The  unbelieving  also  confess  that  God 
is  the  fountain  of  all  blessings,  and  that  they 
ought  to  acquiesce  in  Him  ;  but  with  the  mouth 
only  they  confess  this,  while  they  believe  nothing 
less.  This  then  is  the  reason  why  the  Prophet 
ascribes  what  he  says  to  his  soul,  as  though  he 
had  said,  that  he  did  not  boast  like  hypocrites 
that  God  was  his  portion,  but  of  this  he  had  a 
thorough  conviction."]  Therefore  will  I  hope 
in  him. — See  ver.  21. 


116  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


III.  25-33. 

25  The  Lord  is  good  unto  them  that  wait  for  him,  to  the  soul  that  seeketh  him. 

26  It  is  good  that  a  man  should  both  hope  and  quietly  wait  for  the  salvation  of  the 
27,  28  Lord.     It  is  good  for  a  man  that  he  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth.     He  sitteth 

29  alone  und  keepeth  silence,  because  he  hath  borne  it  upon  him.     He  putteth  his  mouth 

30  in  the  dust,  if  so  be  there  may  be  hope.     He  ^iveth  his  cheek  to  him  that  smiteth 

31  him  :  he  is  filled  full  with  reproach.     For  the  Lord  will  not  cast  off  for  ever. 

32  But  though  he  cause  grief,  yet  will  he  have  compassion  according  to  the  multitude 

33  of  his  mercies.     For  he  doth  not  afflict  willingly,  nor  grieve  the  children  of  men. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL, 

Ver.  25. — Kal  of  HID  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah;  he  uses  only  Niphal  iii.  17,  and  Piel  viii.  15;  xiii.  16;  xiv.  19,  22. 
tIt  .  . 

Kindred  expressions  are  found  in  Ps.  xxv.  3;  Ixix.  7  ;  Is.  xlix.  23. — The  expression  niiT  IMi  1!?"^^  is  found  in  Jeremiah 

T  :        ••        -  T 
several  times  and  in  different  senses,  x.  21  (?)  ;  xxi.  2;  xxix.  13  ;  xxxvii.  7.     Yet  none  of  these  places  seem  to  have  heen  in 

the  Poet's  eye.    If  some  earlier  declaration  was  in  his  mind,  it  was  apparently  Deut.  iv.  29,  where  it  is  said  ^3^"^nr\  '3 

Ver.  26.— [See  crit.  notes  helow.]—T\^Wry,  Jer.  iii.  23. 

Ver.  27.— bj^.  See  i.  14.    S^  J<tJ?J  occurs  only  here.— D"'"1-1^3  frequently  in  Jeremiah,  iii.  4;  xxiv.  25,  ete. 

Ver.  28. — 7£D J,  not  in  Jeremiah.  It  occurs,  besides  here,  only  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  12  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  9.  7itD',  Is.  xl.  15,  is  pro- 
bably from  7!|£3>  to  turn  aside  (see  Deutzsch  at  this  place),  of  which  verb  Jeremiah  makes  frequent  use,  xvi.  13 ;  ixii. 
26,  28. 

Ver. 29.— [This  verse  is  wanting  in  the  Sept.] — 'l-IX  Jeremiah  uses  often,  xxi.  2;  xxvi.  3,  7;  li.  8.    [Calvin:  "Ths 

particle  'SlX  expresses  what  is  difiScult ;  for  when  anything  appears  to  be  incredible,  the  Hebrews  say,  1/it  may  6e."]— The 
phrase  mpjl  K?'  '»  found  not  only  in  Prov.  xix.  18,  but  also  in  Jer.  xxxi.  17. 

Ver.  30.— Neither  the  Part.  7130,  nor  "'n'?,  see  i.  2,  occurs  in  Jeremiah :  TlS  JHJ  's  found  in  Is.  1.  6.— The  expression 
713^113  Vy!i/  occurs  only  here,  yet  there  is  a  similar  construction  [of  J^2U  with  3,  instead  of  j4cc.]  in  Ps.  Ixv.  5;  Ixxxviii. 

4.    The  words  y3tl?  and  713111,  by  themselves,  are  current  in  Jeremiah  ;  see  for  the  first,  xxxi.  14;  xlvi.  10;  1. 10,  for  the 

-  T  T  :  ■.• 

other  vi.  10;  xv.  15  ;  xx.  8  ;  xxiv.  9,  etc. 

Ver.  31. — Jeremiah  never  uses  HJT,  see  ver.  17  ;  ii.  7. 

Ver.  32.— nj'in,  see  i.  4  ;  v.  12.— 0711,  often  in  Jeremiah,  xii.  15 ;  xxxi.  20 ;  xlii.  12,  etc.— nOTl  3i3  is  found,  pointed 
T  -  •  TT-:  : 

thus,  Ps.  cvi.  45,  besides  Is.  Ixiii.  7. — With  regard  to  grammatical  construction,  see  ver.  22. 

Ver.  33.— The  verb  71Jj;,  incUnalum,  depressum  esse  (Piel  again  in  Lam.  v.  11)  Jeremiah  uses  in  no  form.— 'I3v0,  see 
Deut.  xvi.  28.— 71^-  is  Imperf.  Piel  of  71  J',  the  Hiph.  of  which  we  have  in  ver.  32.  This  form  occurs  only  here:  it  is  short- 
ened from  7ir'1,  as  !|T",  ver.  53,  from  -IT^V  See  Olsh.,  p.  547.— U^^K  "'J3,  not  found  in  Jeremiah;  he  says  only  once 
DTX  ''J3>  xxxii.  19.  [If  he  could  use  this  latter  phrase  "only  once,"  he  was  not  so  addicted  to  it  that  he  could  not  use  the 
other  "  only  once."— W.  II.  H.]  The  phrase,  besides  here,  is  found  only  in  Ps.  iv.  3 ;  xlix.  3 ;  Ixii.  10.  At  the  last  two  places 
WMi  ^33  occurs  in  the  immediate  context. 

TT 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  25-38.  The  thought  underlying  this  sec- 
tion is, — the  Lord  has  kind  purposes  towards  the 
children  of  men  in  all  circumstances;  even  if  He 
chastises  them,  He  does  it  for  their  good;  men 
should  so  deport  themselves  in  misfortune  that 
they  may  ensure  the  attainment  of  the  Lord's 
wholesome  intention.  Then  will  He  permit  His 
mercy  to  return  again.  [Here  we  plainly  see 
the  expansion  of  the  assertion  made  in  ver.  20, 
that  l/ie  Lord  will  be  mindful  of  the  soul  bowed  doxvn 
upon  itself  in  submissive  sorrow. — W.  H.  H.]  — 
The  three  verses,  25-27,  begin  with  the  same 
word  31£3,  good,  and  evidently  belong  together, 
as  in  this  section  generally  the  connection  of 
verses  beginning  witli  the  same  initial  is  vei'v 
apparent.  Thus  in  tlie  three  following  triads, 
vers.   28-80,  31-33,  34-86,  the  verses  begin    not 


only  with  the  same  letter,  but  with  homogeneous 
words. 

Ver.  25.  The  LORD  is  good — Good  is  Je- 
hovah— unto    them  that  wait   for   him, — to 

them  who  trust  in  Utm.  [  Wait,  waiting  in  hope, 
is  the  correct  idea. — W.  H.  H.], — to  the  soul 
that  seeketh  him. — The  idea  of  2M2=good,  is 
presented  to  us  in  three  aspects  in  vers.  25--7. 
Here  we  have  the  fundamental  idea,  tiiat  tiio 
Lord  Himself  is  good.  This  belongs  to  His  na- 
ture. He  is  good  even  when  He  causes  pain. 
Man  though  in  trouble,  perceiving  the  goodness 
of  the  Lord,  cannot  defiantly  murmur  or  faint- 
heartedly despair.  He  must  rather  hope  even 
in  Him  who  slays  him,  seek  even  Him  who  seems 
to  thrust  him  away  from  Himself. 

Ver.  26.  It  is  good  that  a  man  should 
both  hope  and  quietly  wait  for  the  salva- 
tion of  the  LORD — Iluppjl  '«  ^*«  who  keeping 
silence   waits  fur  the   salvation  of  Jehovah.      [Th« 


CHAP.  III.  25-33. 


117 


Hebrew  construction  is  difBcult.  The  authorities 
differ  on  important  points.  But  all  the  transla- 
tions result  in  the  same  essential  meaning,  which 
is,  on  the  whole,  as  well  expressed  in  our  com- 
mon English  version,  as  in  any.  It  is  good  both 
hopefully  and  silently,  i.  e  ,  unmurmuringly,  sub- 
missively, to  loait  for  the  salvation  ^f  Jehovah. — 
W.  H.  H.j  From  the  proposition  that  the  Lord 
is  good  to  those  who  wait  for  Him  and  seek  Him, 
follows  necessarily  this  other,  that  the  man  is 
fortunate,  even  in  the  midst  of  chastisement,  who 
patiently  and  silently  hopes  for  the  salvation  of 
the  Lord.  Thence  it  appears  that  3i£0,  yood,  here 
is  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  felix,  happy,  fortu- 
nate, which  it  un  loubtedly  has  in  iv.  9;  Jer. 
xliv.  17;   Is.  iii.  10;    Ps.  cxii.  5. 

[3iC3.  The  attempt  has  been  made  to  take 
this  word  in  verses  -6,  '11  as  a  repetition  of  the 
statement  in  ver.  25,  tliat  Jehovah  is  good  Thus 
Neumann  (see  Geulach),  Good  is  Jehovah  to  those 
who  hope  in  Hun  .  .  .  Good — and  who  waits  .  . 
Good  to  the  man,  etc  This  creates  a  very  harsh 
ellipsis  in  ver.  26,  and  reduces  the  meaning  in 
■ver.  27,  down  to  this,  that  Jehovah  is  good  to 
that  man  only  who  bears  the  yoke  in  his  youth. 
Blatney  and  Boothroyd  avoid  these  two  diifi- 
culties,  by  translating  lip  in  ver.  25  as  a  singu- 
lar noun  (which  Owei<  claims  as  the  correct 
reading  on  the  authority  of  the  Syr.),  and  by 
introducing  an  illative  particle  [therefore,  hence) 
in  ver.  26,  that  is  not  in  the  Hebrew.  BlaynEy: 
Jehovah  is  gracious  unto  him  that  waiieih  for  Him 
.  .  .  He  is  gracious,  therefore  let  him  wait  .  .  .  He 
is  gracious  unto  a  man,  etc.  BoothroyD:  Jehovah 
IS  good  to  him  that  waiteth  for  Him  .  .  .  He  is  good, 
hence  let  him  hope,  etc.  Besides  the  grammatical 
difficulties  above  stated,  these  two  translations, 
by  making  an  independent  proposition  of  ver. 
27,  teaches  the  wretched  doctrine  that  God  is 
necessarily  gracious  or  good  to  a  man  who  is 
afflicted  in  his  youth  They  are,  too,  open  to  the 
grammatical  objection  that  GerlacH  brings 
against  Neumann's  translation,  that  it  would  re- 
quire the  suffix  at  (he  end  of  verse  26,  instead  of 
the  name  Jehovah.  The  repetition  of  the  word 
31£3  in  these  verses  should,  doubtless,  be  regarded 
merely  as  a  sort  of  initial  rhyme,  intended  to 
please  the  ear  and  the  eye,  and  to  fix  the  atten- 
tion.— W  H  H.] — If  3lt3  is  taken  in  the  sense  of 
felix,  the  following  '^^  explains  itself  It  is 
insufferably  har^h  to  take  this  as  Imperf.  Hiph. 
as  many  do.  Ewald  refers  to  this,  §  2o5  a. 
The  examples  adduced  by  him  in  that  place,  af- 
ford no  analogy  to  the  case  before  us  Whj' 
should  not  i^Q  here  be  construed  precisely  as  it 
is  immediately  afterwards  in  ver  27  ?  The 
double  1  is  easily  explained,  if  we  take  ^Tl'  as 
a  verbal  adjective  from  iT}\  as  Gesenius  [Thes  , 
p  590.  comp.  327),  Winer,  Fcerst  and  others 
do,  althoUfiLi  this  adjective  does  not  occur  else- 
where. All  objection  to  this  may  be  urged  from 
Don,  which  is  only  found  besides  here  in  Is. 
xlvii.  5,  and  Hab.  ii.  19,  where  it  has  an  adver- 
bial signification.  But  the  question  is,  whether 
Don  is  a  a  pure  adverb,  or  not  rather  an  original 

adjective    noun    (see    D/^X,    a  forefront,  porch). 


EwALD  affirms  the  latter,  |  204  b.  Comp.  I  168 
g.  In  this  original  adjective  signification  may 
Don  stMiid  here.  Maurkr.  indeed,  proposes  to 
take  7''n'  and  DO'T  subsiajitively,  bonum  est  ex- 
pectare  et  silere-  propr.,  expectatio  et  silentium= 
tacita  expectatio.     He  refers  in  this  connection  to 

7''D">.  But,  as  Ewald  shows,  §  153  a,  this  for- 
mation occurs  even  where  it  has  an  abstract 
sense,  as  ''3"^  obtreetratio,  ri2  totality,  yet  there 
is  always  a  passive  idea  beneath  it,  as,  for  ex- 
ample, retributio  originally  retribution,  disposition 

originally  the  being  disposed.  So  also  vO")  was 
originally  obtrectatum,  rh2  consummatum.  Ac- 
cording to  this  tTV  would  be  expectatum.  But 
this  sense  does  not  suit  here.  The  connection 
requires    the    pure    abstract  idea    of  expectatio. 

Therefore  we  take  TIT  and  DOH  in  the  adjective 
sense,  and  the  double  1  for  as  well  as,  as  also,  or 
both — and.  [^Both  hopeful  and  silent  or  submis- 
sive.] 

Ver.  27.  It  is  good — Good  is  it — for  a  man 
that  he  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth. — If 
that  one  is  happy,  who  silently  waits  and  en- 
dures, then  it  follows  that  sorrow  itself  lias  its 
good  side :  for  it  begets  that  silent  endurance. 
It  is  the  hot  fire  that  ripens  that  noble  fruit. 
Therefore  in  the  next  place  the  Poet  calls  bear- 
ing the  yoke  something  good.  He  adds,  it  is 
true,  in  hisyouth.  This  seems  to  have  caused  the 
interpreters  difficulty,  even  in  old  times.  The 
Aldine  edition  of  the  Sept.,  and  thereupon  Theo- 
DOTiON,  translated  £/c  veorrfTOC  ahrov,  from  his 
youth.  And  in  fact  many  Codices  read  V">?>'50, 
from  his  youth.  But  the  idea  of  youth  is  not  to 
be  taken  in  too  restricted  a  sense.  By  it  the  Poet 
would  indicate  evidently,  not  youth  in  opposition 
to  manhood,  but  the  period  of  still  fresh  unbroken 
strength,  in  opposition  to  the  period  of  broken 
and  diminished  vitality.  He  would  then  under- 
stand manhood  as  included  in  youth.  He  would 
not  exclude  the  thought  that  it  may  be  whole- 
some, in  a  certain  sense,  for  the  old  to  bear  the 
yoke.  He  means  only  that  the  time  of  vigorous 
strength  is  especially  the  time  when  bearing  the 
yoke  may  be  of  advantage.  For  then  a  man  is 
pre-eminently  pliable.  Then  can  he  learn,  in 
the  school  of  the  cross,  things  that  will  be  of  the 
greatest  use  to  him  in  his  later  life.  [Calvin 
understands  the  yoke  as  that  of  instruction,  in- 
stead of  chastisement ;  submission  to  the  teacher. 
So  the  Chaldee  paraphrases  explain  it.  But  the 
whole  context  requires  us  to  understand  the  yoke 
of  affliction  and  submission  to  Divine  Providence. 
See  especially  the  following  verses,  28-33. — W. 
H.  H.] 

J.  D.  Michaelis  has  concluded  from  this  verse, 
that  Jeremiah  wrote  it  when  a  young  man.  It 
seems  to  me  that  there  is  some  truth  at  the 
foundation  of  this  remark.  In  this  third  chap- 
ter the  person  of  the  speaker  stands  out  in  the 
foreground.  In  the  connection  of  this  chapter, 
then,  this  expression  can  certainly  be  better  un- 
derstood in  the  mouth  of  a  man  in  the  vigor  of 
his  strength,  than  in  the  mouth  of  an  old  man. 
Since  then  Jeremiah,  at  the  time  of  the  captuie 


J18 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


of  Jerusalem,  stood  at  the  very  least  on  the  thresh- 
old of  old  age,  having  a  ministry  of  forty-two 
years  behind  him,  which  he  had  begun  rather 
after,  than  before,  or  at  his  twentieth  year  (see 
Introduction  to  Jer.  Proph.,  p.  xiii.),  therefore  this 
place  is  rather  against  than  for  Jeremiah's  au- 
thorship of  this  Song.  [Is  it  natural  for  a  young 
man  to  talk  about  patiently  and  silently  bearing 
a  yoke?  Is  it  not  natural  fur  an  old  man.  look- 
ing back  upon  a  long  experience,  to  recognize 
the  benefit  of  early  crosses  and  afflictions  ?  Could 
we  imagine  anything  more  likely  to  be  said  by 
the  pious  Prophet  in  his  old  age,  than  what  is 
here  said?  And  is  it  not  just  what  his  personal 
sufferings  that  begun  in  his  youth  long  before 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  would  have  led  him  to 
say?  And,  finally,  do  we  not  recognize  every- 
where inthese  Lamentations,  the  spirit  of  one  who 
has  been  long  a  stranger  to  happiness,  who, — un- 
like the  young  man,  strong,  sanguine  and  self- 
reliant, — has  lost  all  hope  save  a  hope  in  God, 
looking  far  onwards  into  the  hidden  future,  that 
is  to  be  ivaitedfor  in  silent  passive,  submission? — 
Wordsworth  :  "  The  sentiment  before  us  is  very 
appropriate  to  Jeremiah,  who  had  been  chastened 
in  early  life  by  God,  and  had  thus  learnt  a  les- 
son of  patience  and  cheerful  resignation  under 
the  severest  personal  afflictions;  and  he  here 
recognizes  th«  benefit  of  that  early  discipline." 
— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  28.  He  sitteth  alone  and  keepeth 
silent. — The  bearing  of  the  yoke  i.'*  not  uncon- 
ditionally wholesome  for  a  man,  but  only  when 
it  is  done  in  the  right  way.  That  is  no  right 
and  wholesome  way  of  bearing  the  cross,  when 
one  is  impatient  and  perverse,  and  desires  to 
shake  off  the  yoke.  Rather,  the  yoke  should  be 
borne  in  silent  and  patient  submission. — The 
silting  alone  is  in  opposition  to  cheerful  inter- 
course with  men.  Tliis  Jeremiah  himself  makes 
explicitly ^jonspicuous,  when  he  says,  xv.  17,  "I 
sat  not  in  the  assembly  of  the  joyful  [E.  V.,  the 
mockers'^,  nor  rejoiced  ;  I  sat  alone,  because  of 
Thy  hand :  for  Thou  hast  filled  me  with  indigna- 
tion." Only  in  silence  and  solitude  do  Divine 
chastisements  affect  the  heart.  Whoever  permits 
himself  to  be  diverted  by  the  noise  of  the  world, 
drowns  the  voice  of  God,  which  speaks  to  our 
heart  by  means  of  the  yoke.  Compare,  besides, 
i.  1  ;  Lev.  xiii.  46. — And  is  silent:  comp  ii.  10, 
18  ;  Jer.  xlvii.  6  ;  xlviii.  2. — Because  he  hath 
borne  it  upon  him, — when  [because^  Heimposcd 
it  on  him.  The  old  translators  (Sept.,  Jerome, 
Syri.\c)  have  taken  the  verb  in  the  sense  of  taking 
upon  ones  self  [so  E.  V.,  Calvin  and  Owen],  be- 
cause they  thought,  the  subject  being  wanting, 
the  subject  of  the  immediately  preceding  verbs 

must  be  supplied.     But  the  Hebrew  verb  (7DJ, 

as  also  7l£D)  means  tollere,  imponere  [/o  lay  upon, 
to  impose'].  The  whole  context  readily  supplies 
Jehovah  as  the  subject,  and  the  word  itself  gives 
the  object.  [Brougiiton,  Henderson,  Noyks 
and  GiRN.vcH,  all  agree  with  N.\K(1elsbach,  in 
taking  ihe  verb  in  an  active  sense,  and  in  making 
God  the  subject  of  the  verb, — hecaii.ic,  or  when  lie 
laid  it  upon  him.  Calvin,  evidently  dissatisfied 
with  his  own  rendering,  confesses  that  the  ex.- 
pression  does  not  seem  natural  to  him.  and  sug 
gesls   another    reading.       Noyes    remarks    that 


"  the  name  of  God  is  understood,  as  often  in 
Job,"  and  refers  to  his  note  on  Job  iii.  20 — W. 
H.  H.] 

[Luther,  Pareau,  De  Wette,  Maurer,  The- 
Nius  and  Noyes,  make  vers.  28-30  dependent  on 
"3,  that,  in  verse  27,  and  expository  of  the  mean- 
ing of  hearing  the  yoke.  It  is  good  that  a  man  bear 
the  yoke  in  his  youth,  that  he  sit  alone  and  is  silent, 
etc.,  that  he  put  his  mouth  in  the  dust,  etc.,  that  he 
give  his  cheek  to  him  that  smiteth  him,  etc.  This 
gives  a  good  sense  ;  but  the  emphatic  idea  in 
ver.  27,  is, — not  that  a  man  bear  the  yoke,  but 
that  he  bear  it  in  his  youth;  it  is  hardly  possible, 
therefore,  that  vers.  28-30  can  be  an  expansion 
of  ver.  27,  without  showing  why  it  is  good  for  a 
man  to  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth.  We  are  com- 
pelled, therefore,  to  interpret  vers.  28-30,  inde- 
pendently of  ver.  27.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  29.  He  putteth  his  mouth  in  the 
dust. — This  expression  is  found  only  here.  It 
is  different  from  the  expression  lick  the  dust  (Ps. 
Ixxii.  9;  Mic.  vii.  17;  Is.  xlix.  23).  For  whilst 
the  latter  denotes  only  the  lowest  degree  of  sub- 
jection, the  former  denotes  likewise  speechless- 
ness, since  he  who  has  put  his  mouth  in  the  dust 
cannot  speak.  Yet  it  is  not  meant  that  he  who  is 
humbled  in  the  dust  cannot  say  anything  at  all. 
Only  he  shall  restrain  himself  from  murmuring. 
Ejaculations  of  humble  imploring  prayer  may 
be  extorted  from  the  heart.  As  such  an  ejacu- 
lation we  must  regard  the  words — if  so  be  there 
may  be  hope, — perhaps  there  is  hope.  For  if 
we  take  these  as  the  words  of  the  Poet,  then  we 
cannot  understand  why  they  occur  just  here. 
They  would  in  that  case  stand  as  well  or  better 
at  the  end  of  ver.  80,  in  place  of  he  is  filled  full 
with  reproach.  Here  at  the  close  of  ver.  29,  they 
are  only  in  place,  if  they  can  be  brought  into 
organic  union  with  the  first  member  of  the  verse. 
This  is  done  if  we  take  them  as  what  the  hum- 
bled one  is  permitted  to  say,  or  rather  to  think, 
in  spite  of  his  putting  his  mouth  in  the  dust.  I 
do  not  on  this  account  think,  that  we  should  sup- 
ply "^OnS,  saying,  for  it  would  illy  suit  to  say — 
he  becomes  dumb  speaking.  We  must,  there- 
fore, understand  the  sentence,  as  indeed  a  decla- 
ration of  the  humbled  one,  but  as  an  independent 
exclamation,  not  grammatically  connected  with 
the  preceding  sentence. 

Ver.  30.  If  the  three  propositions,  vers.  28-30, 
be  compared  one  with  another,  a  certain  grada- 
tion will  be  perceived.  For  sitting  alone  and 
silent  is  comparatively  easy.  To  put  the  mouth 
in  the  dust  and  yet  to  hope,  is  more  difficult. 
But  the  hardest  of  all,  without  question,  is  to 
present  the  cheek  to  the  smiter  and  patiently  ac- 
cept the  full  measure  of  disgrace  that  is  to  come 
upon  us.— He  giveth — offers— 'hia  cheek  to 
him  that  smiteth  him. — By  him  that  unite fh 
him  we  are  not,  to  understand,  exclusively  and 
immediately,  God.  For  God  smites  not  immedi- 
ately, but  by  the  instruiaentality  of  men.  "The 
Lord  hath  bidden  him,"  said  David  in  reference 
to  the  revilings  of  Shimei  (2  Sam.  xvi.  11).  For 
the  sense,  see  Job  xvi.  10;  Matt.  v.  39.  [Cal- 
vin: "  There  are  many  who  submit  to  God  when 
they  perceive  His  hand;  as,  for  instance,  when 
any  one  is  afflicted  with  a  disease,  he  knows  that 
it  is   a   chastisement   that  proceeds    froir  God ; 


CHAP.  III.  34-39. 


119 


when  pestilence  happens,  or  famine,  from  the 
inclemency  of  the  weather,  the  hand  of  God  ap- 
pears to  them;  and  many  then  conduct  them- 
Belves  in  a  suitable  manner  :  but  when  an  enemy 
meets  one,  and  when  injured,  he  instantly  says, 
'I  have  now  nothing  to  do  with  God,  but  thut 
wicked  enemy  treats  me  disgracefully.'  It  is 
then  for  this  reason  that  the  Prophet  shows  that 
the  patience  of  the  godly  ought  to  extend  to  in- 
juries of  this  kind."] — He  is  filled  full  •with 
reproach. — [Calvin:  "  Thore  are  two  kinds 
of  injuries;  for  the  wicked  either  treat  us  with 
violence,  or  assail  us  with  reproaches  ;  and  re- 
proach is  the  bitterest  of  all  things,  and  inflicts 
a  most  grievous  wound  on  all  ingenuous  minds."] 

Vers.  31-33.  The  triad  now  following  states 
the  reason  why  it  is  good  not  to  despair  in 
trouble,  but  to  persevere  in  silent  hope.  The 
reason  is  contained  in  three  specifications  ;  or, 
more  correctly,  in  two,  the  second  of  which  is 
shown  in  two  particulars. 

Ver.  31.  The  first  reason  is  a  negative  one.  For 
the  Lord  [Adonai,  not  Jehovah.  Yet  see  Infr., 
Add.  Rem.,  p.  32,]  will  not  cast  off  for  ever. 
— The  same  expression  as  Ps.  Ixxvii.  8;  comp. 
xliv.  24;  Ixxiv.  1.  Calvin:  "It  is  certain  there 
will  be  no  patience,  except  there  be  hope  .  .  . 
As  patience  cherishes  hope,  so  hope  is  the  founda- 
tion of  patience;  and  hence   consolation  is,  ac- 


cording to  Paul,  connected  with  patience ;,  Rom. 
XV.  4."] 

Ver.  32.  The  second  reason  contains  two  par- 
ticulars. The  first  is  a  positive  one:  the  com- 
passion of  God  after  He  has  a  long  time  smitten, 
will  yet  appear  again.  But  though  he  cause 
grief,  yet  will  he  have  compassion  ac- 
cording to  the  multitude  of  his  mercies. — 
Foi-  if  Be  has  ajjiicted,  then  in  He  moved  to  compas- 
sion according  to  His  great  mercy.  With  regard  to 
the  meaning,  see  Hos.  vi.  1  ,  Job  v.  18;  Ps.  xxx. 
6  (5).    [See  also  Is.  liv.  7,  8;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  32-o4.] 

Ver.  33.  The  second  particular  of  the  second 
reason  is  expressed  in  a  negative  form:  God 
must,  after  He  has  smitten,  have  compassion 
again,  because  chastisement  is  not  with  Him  an 
end,  but  a  means.  The  essential  disposition  of 
His  heart  is  love.  Therefore  chastisement  is  not 
the  proper  or  true  expression  of  His  feeling  to- 
wards us.  For  he  doth  not  afflict  w^illingly 
[marg.,  from  his  heart],  nor  grieve — i/et  lie 
grieves  \_and  grieve. — W.  H.  H.]  the  children 
of  men. — Frorn  the  heart:  Not  out  of  His  heart, 
but  if  we  may  be  allowed  to  speak  of  God  anthro- 
popathically,  chastisement  comes  from  His  head. 
The  antithesis  indicated  here  is  not  expressed  in 
the  context  [willingly,  see  Num.  xvi.  28],  For 
the  sense,  see  Ps.  cxix.  75  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  41 ;  Deut. 
xxviii.  63. 


III.  34-39. 

34,  35       To  crush  under  his  feet  all  the  prisoners  of  the  earth.     To  turn  aside  the 

36  right  of  a  man  before  the  face  of  the  Most  High.     To  subvert  a  man  in  his  cause, 

37  the   Lord  approveth  not.     Who  is  he  that  saith,  and  it  cometh  to  pass,  when  the 

38  Lord   commandeth  it  not  ?     Out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Most  High  proceedeth  not 

39  evil  and  good  ?     Wherefore  doth  a  living  man  complain,  a  man  for  the  punishment 
of  his  sins  ? 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Vers.  34-36. — The  three  infinitives  which  begin  these  verses,  can  only  depend  on  HNT-  But  HXI  in  connection  with 
vK  or  Sy  has  the  meaning  of  intueri  in  aliquid,  fixing  the  eyes  on  something  (Is.  xvii.  7  ;  Ex.  v.  21).     Owing  to  the  affinity 

between  Sn,   /V  and  7  (See  Ew.,  §  217,  c,  d,  i),  7  HNT  can  be  used  for  7X  HNI-    So  Ps.  Ixiv.  6,  and  here  [Gerlach  refers 

■■        -  :  ■    :        T  T  ]  ••         T  T 

also  to  1  Sam.  xvi.  7].    The  necessity  of  choosing  a  word  beginning  with  7,  on  account  of  the  alphabetical  arrangement,  has 

here  at  any  rate  decidedly  prevailed.  [Neumann,  according  to  Gerlach,  makes  these  infinitives  dependent  on  X7  of  ver.  33, 
God  does  not  willingly  allow  all  that  Israel  suffei's  ;  but  this  involves  great  difficulty  in  interpreting  last  clauses  of  vers.  35, 
36.— W.  H.  H.]  , 

Ver.  34. — X3T  does  not  occur  in  the  Kal,  Jeremiah  uses  it  once  in  the  Pual,  xliv.  10. — The  suffix  in  V7JI  (the  peculiar 
TT  1  T  :- 

opinion  of  Otto,  who  takes  it  as  synonymous  with  ''  'JB/j  we  dismiss),  can  only  be  referred  to  the  subject  concealed  in 

J{3n.    Use  the  Participle  instead  of  the  Infinitive,  and  the  reference  is  instantly  plain. — TDX  Jeremiah  never  uses. 

TT  ■  T 

Ver.  35. — The  phrase  '3  t03LJ'O  HtSn  never  occurs  in  Jeremiah.    [Yet  he  was  most  familiar  with  it,  especially  in  hi» 

favorite  book  of  Deuteronomy. — W.  II.  II. J    He  uses  n£3n   many   times  in  another  sense,  v.  25;  vi.  12;  vii.  24,  etc. — • 

T33~Di32'D,  comp.  D'JVJK  £3DEy?0,  Jer.  v.  2s.— |V7j^  as  a  name  of  God,  not  in  Jeremiah;  he  uses  the  word  only  twice, 

in  a  local  sense  xx.  2 ;  xxxvi.  10.     [.See  Inlr.,  Add.  Rem.  p.  32.] 

Ver.  36.  H-iy,  oi'l.V  I'iel,  Pual  and  Hithp.,  occur.     The  word  does  not  occur  at  all  in  Jeremiah.     In  Lamentations  the 

substantive  HPH't  ver.  59,  is  also  found. — 3^T,  Jer.  xv.  10  ;  xxv.  31,  etc. — The  construction  ij''13  DHX  DH'  seems  to  be 

T  T-  •  •      :  T  T  •  — 

chosen  to  vary  the  phrase  from  ver.  35 ;  for  elsewhere  we  find  only  t^DU^O  T\^^  (Job  viii.  3  ;  xxxiv.  12),  pli'  (Job  viii.  ?>), 
or  1-3  'ITTl  (Ps.  cxlvi.  9). 

Ver.  37. — [^PIPI.  Naegelsbach  in  his  Grammar  refers  to  a  similar  use  of  3d  Pers.  Fern.  Sing,  of  verb  in  Jud.  x.  9 ;  1  Sam. 
xxx.  6,  "'S  lypl ;'  Jer.  vii.  31  ;  xix.  5,  'SS-Sj;  nnSj?  ;  Jer.  xliv.  21,  'laS-SjT  n"^>'P1 ;  and  Jo.sh.  xi.  20;  2  Kings  xxiv. 
3,  nirn  The  last  two  examples  show  Ihat  Owen  is  wrong  when  he  says  that  this  verb  is  "probably  always  masculine, 
when  it  has  this  meaning,"  and  should,  tlierefore,  be  taken  here  as  second  person  masculine. — W.  H.  H.] 


120 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Ver.  38. — I  do  not  think  that  ver.  38  depends  on  "lOX  in  ver.  37,  as  Luther  translates,  Who  then  may  say,  that  such  a 

-T 

thing  is  done  without  the  Lord's  command,  and  that  neither  evil  nor  good  comes  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Most  High  ?    For  TOX 

~  T 

>n  ver.  37  is  not  merely  to  say,  but  it  involves  here  the  abstract  idea  of  command,  which  does  not  need  an  object  following 
after  it,  in  order  to  define  it.  But  ver.  38  must  be  taken  independently  as  a  question.  See  Exeg.  notes  below  on  ver.  36. — 
DVn,  .Ter.  xliv.  9.  . 

Ver.  39. — Tl  DIN  reminds  us  of  the  grammatical  construction  of  T\  7X,  Ps.  xlii.  3;  Ixxxiv.  3;  2  Kings  xix.4,  16. 

T  T  —  .. 

Jeremiah  uses  the  adjective  T)  only  in  tlie  formula  of  an  oath,  >■"  ^H  ',  or,  JJ5  Tl,  iv.  2  ;  v.  2  ;  xii.  16,  etc. :  in  xxxviii.  2, 
Vt  seems  to  be  a  verb, — see  at  that  place. — {<£jn,  see  i.  8  ;  Jeremiah  uses  neither  in  the  bingular  nor  in  the  plural. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  34-39.  We  have  already,  at  ver.  30,  dis- 
criminated between  an  indirect  and  an  immediate 
chustiseraeni.  It  is  there  left  undecided,  which 
may  be  intended.  But  this  point  remaining 
uncertain  must  now  be  made  plain.  All  the 
grounds  of  consolation,  brought  together  in  what 
precedes,  must  be  acknowledged  as  valid  and 
substantial.  But  they  apply  only  to  such  sor- 
rows as  those  of  which  God  is  esteemed  the  im- 
mediate author.  But  how  is  it  with  those  sor- 
rows which  the  malice  of  men  inflict  upon  us? 
The  opinion  might  arise,  that  these  evils  befall  us 
without  the  intervention  of  God,  and  that  He 
takes  no  notice  of  them.  Yet  these  evils  are 
very  numerous ;  and  what  consolation  can  be 
afforded  against  these  evils  from  wliat  is  said  in 
vers.  25-33,  to  those  who  are  suffering  under  the 
hand  of  God  ?  To  this  question  it  is  now  ex- 
plicitly answered,  in  vers.  37,  38,  that  nothing 
in  the  world  is  done  without  God's  will,  that  no 
man  has  the  power  to  act  with  absolute  creative 
independence,  that  both  good  and  bad  fortune 
depend  on  the  will  of  the  Lord.  Consequently 
there  is  no  reason  for  sighing  despairingly  over 
any  calamity,  whatever  it  may  be.  There  is  no 
absolute  misfortune — except  sin  !  All  sorrow  of 
the  heart  then  concentrates  itself  on  the  source 
of  evil,  on  wickedness. 

Ver.  34.  To  crush — to  trample — under  his 
feet. — The  pronoun  /us  must  refer  to  the  subject 
of  the  infiuilive  to  crush.  [Owen  absurdly  refers 
it  to  man  in  the  last  verse,  where  the  last  words 
literally  are  children  of  man. — W.  H.  H.]  All 
the  prisoners  of  the  earth. — This  cannot 
mean  literally  all  the  prisoners  on  the  whole 
earth.  This  is  evident  from  the  use  of  the  verb  to 
see    (HXI),  ver.   3b,   in    the  perfect   tense.     The 

*■        TT  ^ 

Poet  can  only  have  in  his  eye  real,  concrete  cir- 
cumstances. Only  those  prisoners  can  be  in- 
tended, already  spoken  of  above,  i.  3,  5,  18. 
yx,  earth,  [improperly  translated  land,  by  Blay- 
NEY,  BooTHROYD  and  Henderson]  is  not  against 
this;  see  Ps.  xliv.  4;  xxxvii.  3.  Delitzsch  at 
this  place,  Gesen.  Thes.,  p.  154.  [Blayney's 
arguments  that  the  prisoners  intended  are  those 
held  and  enslaved  for  debt,  could  satisfy  no  one 
but  himself.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  35.  To  turn  aside  the  right  of  a 
man — to  bend  the  ru/ht  of  a  man  \_i.  e.,  to  deprive 
a  man  of  his  legal  rights. — W.  11.  H.].  See  Ex. 
xxiii.  6;  Deut.  xvi.  19;  xxiv.  17;  xxvii.  19;  1 
Sam.  viii.  3  ;  cunip.  I'rov.  xvii.  23  ;  xviii.  5  ;  Is. 
X.  2. — Before  the  face  of  the  Most  High. — 
The  auilior  thinks  hereof  the  omnipresent  and 
omni:^cieut  Goil,  who  enthroned  on  high  looks 
far  down  on  Heaven  and  earth  (I's.  cxiii.  5,  6). 


[Blayney  translates  |V7^  {the  Most  High)  here  a 
superior  •  asserting  that  it  cannot  refer  to  God, 
because  no  one  can  wrest  judgment  where  He  is 
the  Judge.  The  meaning  evidently  is,  however, 
to  pervert  judgment  at  earthly  tribunals,  though 
this  is  done,  as  it  were,  before  the  very  face  of  the 
Most  Iliyh,  who  sees  all  things  and  is  present 
everywhere. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  36.  To  subvert. — The  word  means  to  bend, 
to  bend  down,  and  is  used  both  in  reference  to 
persons  ( Job  xix.  6  ;  Ps.  cxix.  78  ;  Eccl.  vii.  13), 
and  things  (Am.  viii.  5;  Job  viii.  3,  etc.).  A 
man  in  his  cause — in  his  laio-suit.  The  Lord 
approveth  (marg.,  seeth)  not.  Has  not  the  Lord 
seen  that?  In  this  sentence  the  significaiion  of 
the  verb  and  the  form  of  the  proposition  are 
doubtful.  As  regards  the  meaning  of  the  verb 
riNI,  I  do  not  believe  it  can  be  taken  in  the  sense 

T  T 

of  choosing,  preferring  (see  Gen.  xli.  33 ;  Deut. 
xii.  13;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13)  ;  or  in  a  sense  derived 
from  that  meiiiiing,  agreeing  to,  allowing  (Ewald). 
For  where  HXI  has  the  meaning  oi choosing,  there 
are  always  a  number  of  objects  placed  before  the 
sight,  among  which  the  subject,  after  looking 
round  by  way  of  examination,  makes  his  choice. 
But  it  cannot  be  said  that  where  God  permits  the 
injustice  done  by  men.  He  has  positively  chosen  it. 
[The  learned  and  sagacious  commentator,  in  the 
heat  of  his  argument,  has  made  a  singular  blun- 
der. The  proposition  is  not  necessarily  a  ques- 
tion, involving  an  affirmative  answer,  but  may  be 
a  direct  affirmation,  that  God  does  not  approve, 
choose,   or  look    with    favor   on    such    injustice 

(nX"1  nS).— W.  H.  H.]  Further,  this  sense  would 
not  suit  the  construction  of  the  infinitive  with 
^  depending  on  HXT  (see  Gram,  note,  vers.  34- 
36,  above).  We  are  obliged  then  to  take  this 
verb  in  its  natural,  original  sense  oi  seeing.  But 
in  that  case  it  is  clear  that  the  proposition  must 
be  taken  as  a  question,  as  in  verse  38.  For  it 
were  a  contradiction  to  say,  the  perverting  of 
the  right  bifore  the  face  of  the  Most  High,  the  Lord 
does  not  see.  What  is  done  before  the  face  of  the 
Lord,  He  cannot  fail  to  see.  This  is  the  very 
basis  of  the  argument.  If  there  were  anything 
which  the  Lord  doth  not  see,  we  might  allow  that 
that  particular  thing  was  done  without  His  con- 
sent. But  since  He  sees  everything,  then  must 
everything  that  is  done,  be  done  with  His  con- 
sent. The  absence  of  the  interrogation  is  no 
inore  remarkable  than  at  ver.  38.  See  for  ex- 
ample Job  ii.  10,  my  Gr.,  §  107,  1.  The  perfect 
form  of  the  verb,  PINT,  shows  that  the  Poet  had 

T  T 

here  especially  in  mind  the  oppression  that  had 
befallen  Israel  and  the  Prophet.  He  would  say, 
Must  not  the  Lord  have  seen  all  the  misery  which 
the  Israelites  had  suffered  as  captives,  or  by  the 


CHAP.  III.  34-39. 


121 


injustice  of  the  mighty,  all  the  misery  especially 
which  had  extorted  from  the  Poet  the  foregoing 
lamentation  ?  If  he  had  had  in  his  eye,  not  the 
concrete  and  actual,  but  merely  general  and 
possible  facts,  he  would,  without  doubt,  have  used 
nx^',  as  BoTTCHER  has  remarked.  See  below 
xiji,  ver.  38.  [The  English  version,  the  Lord 
approveth  not ;  or  as  BEOuaHTON  has  it,  the  Lord 
Liketh  not,  is  undoubtedly  correct,  and  is  adopted 
by  Blayn  ey  (who  translates  the  verb  seeth  not,  but 
explains  it  in  the  sense  of  not  approving),  Booth- 
EOYD,  Henderson  and  Wordsworth.  It  avoids 
the  harsh  and  arbitrary  explanation  of  supposing 
vers.  34-36,  the  language  of  an  objector,  who 
affirms  the  Lord  doth  not  regard  these  acts  of  op- 
pression and  injustice,  as  Calvin  and  Owen  sug- 
gest. It  also  avoids  the  equally  arbitrary  as- 
sumption of  Naeoelsbach,  Gerlach  and  Noyes, 
that  these  words  are  put  interrogatively.  There 
is  nothing  in  the  form  or  context  to  suggest  a 
question.  Ver.  38  is  no  parallel  to  this  case : 
for  there  the  question  is  suggested  by  the  ques- 
tion that  precedes  and  the  question  that  follows 
it:  the  whole  triplet  is  in  the  interrogative  style. 
It  is  dangerous  to  allow  the  right  to  assume  an 
interrogation  for  the  sake  of  surmounting  a  dif- 
ficulty. Were  this  license  generally  accepted, 
the  Bible  could  be  made  to  teach  the  very  reverse 
of  what  it  does  teach,  by  assuming  that  its  posi- 
tive affirmations,  are  interrogations  emphasizing 
the  contradiction  of  what  is  apparently  asserted. 
The  opinion  that  HXI  means  to  view  with  pleasure, 
preference  or  approbation,  only  when  followed  by 
the  preposition  3,  has  been  so  generally  accepted, 
that  Dr.  J.  A.  Alexander  hesitated  to  give  HXI 

1  TT 

followed  by  /  that   meaning  in  Is.  liii.   2.     Yet 

only  that  meaning  suits  that  passage:  and  in  1 

Sam.  xvi.  7,  we  have  nx'l  with  7  twice  in  this 
T  T  : 

exact  meaning  of  regarding  with  pleasure,  with 
favor,  with  approbation, — "  man  looketh  on  the 
outward  appearance,  but  Jehovah  looketh  on  the 
heart."  It  will  be  found  on  examination  of  those 
passages  where  HNT  is  construed  with  3,  that 
the  preposition  intensifies  the  sense  and  seems 
to  denote  looking  steadfastly  at  a  thing,  feasting  the 
eyes  upon  it  witii  inward  delight,  or  with  exulta- 
tion as  over  a  prostrate  foe.  But  HNI  without 
3,  is  also  used  to  express  the  idea  of  looking  at  a 
thing  with  indulgence  and  allotoance,  where  no 
special  compbicency  is  implied.  It  is  thus  used 
here,  and  in  exactly  the  same  sense  that  it  has 
in  Hab.  i.  13,  "  Thou  art  of  purer  eyes  than  to 
behold  evil,"  V"^  rillD.  Wordsworth:  "The 
sense  is, — For  a  man  to  crush  under  his  feet  all 
the  captives  of  the  earth  (as  the  Chaldeans 
crushed  indiscriminately  their  Hebrew  captives, 
without  regard  to  sex  or  age),  to  pervert  a  man's 
cause  in  the  face  of  the  Most  High,  to  subvert  a 
man  in  his  cause — this  the  Lord  does  not  look  on 
with  approval.  For  He  is  of  purer  eyes  than  to 
behold  iniquity." — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  37.  Who  is  he  that  saith,  and  it 
Cometh  to  pass,  ^rhen  the  Lord  com- 
mandeth  it  not  ? —  Who  is  he  that  spoke  and  it 
teas  done,  unless  the  Lord  commanded  i/?  [Noyes: 
"  Who  is  he  that  can  command  anything  to  be 
done,  so  that  it  shall  be  efl'ected,  unless  Jehovah 


permit  or  order  it  to  be  done  ?"]  This  verse 
affords  the  proof  that  the  evils,  enumerated  in 
vers.  34-36,  had  not  befallen  those  who  sufi"ered 
them,  without  God's  consent.  This  verse  re- 
minds us  that  there  is  only  one  single  absolute 
creative  causality ;  for  the  words  TIPI  "^OK  [^« 
said — and  there  was]  do,  without  doubt,  refer  to 
the  creative-word  (Gen.  i.  3,  etc.).  Were  there 
a  man  of  whom  it  could  be  said, — Be  spake  and  it 
was  done,  He  commanded  and  it  stood  fast  (Ps. 
xxxiii.  9),  then  it  might  be  possible  that  those 
evils  had  befallen  Israel  at  his  command,  and  not 
Jehovah's.  Evidently  the  Poet  has  in  mind  tbese 
words  just  quoted  from  Ps.  xxxiii.  9,  although 
he  quotes  from  memory  as  appears  from  the  sub- 
stitution of  ''i^P^l  for  ■'nil.  But  see  the  femin.  in 
such  cases,  my  Gr.,  |  60,  6  6  [see  Gram,  nqtt 
above'].  The  second  clause  of  ver.  37  is  evidently 
suggested  by  the  second  clause  of  Ps.  xxxiii.  9, 
only  it  is  changed  into  a  negative  sentence, 
which  serves  likewise  to  define  the  implied  nega- 
tive of  the  first  clause.  There  are  some,  indeed, 
in  reference  to  whom  the  expression  'HPl  "ll?** 
\he  spoke  and  it  came  to  pass]  might  in  a  certain 
sense  be  used,  but  only  when  the  Lord  has  also 
commanded  what  is  done.  There  is  no  one 
whose  will  is  efficient  without  the  consent  and 
command  of  the  Lord.  The  explanation.  Who 
then  may  say,  that  such  a  thing  is  done  without  the 
Lord's  command?  (Ldther,  IIosenmdeller  and 
others),  is  ungrammatical.  It  ignores  the  Im- 
perfect with  Wav  consecut.  [The  thought  is  the 
same  as  in  Amos  iii.  6,  Shall  there  be  evil  in  a  city, 
and  the  LORD  hath  not  done  it? — Owen  gives  an 
entirely  new  version.  Who  is  he  who  says.  That 
Thou  art  Lord  who  dost  not  command?  This  is  on 
the  assumption  that  vers.  34-38  contain  the  senti- 
ments of  an  objector,  whose  argument  now  is,  in 
vers.  37,  38,  "that  God  as  a  Lord  or  Sovereign 
does  not  command  or  order  events,  and  for  this 
reason,  because  both  evil  and  good  cannot  come 
from  Him."  This  interpretation,  harsh,  difficult 
and  against  authority,  could  only  be  accepted  in 

case  nxi  K7,  ver.  36,  must  mean  does  not  see, 
regard  or  observe,  and  not  does  not  approve,  (see 
notes,  ver.  36).  and  also  in  case  ^"il^r}]^  in  this 
verse,  must  be  rendered  as  2d  person  masculine, 
and  not  3d  person  feminine  (see  Gram,  note 
above). — The  connection  of  this  triplet  with  the 
preceding  one,  according  to  Dr.  Naegelsbach's 
interpretation  of  ver.  36, — has  not  the  Lord  seen 
that? — is  very  obvious.  But  it  is  no  objection  to 
the  other  interpretation — the  Lord  does  not  ap- 
prove, that  these  three  verses  recognize  God's 
agency  in  the  evils  that  befall  men.  It  is  the 
problem  constantly  recurring  in  the  Bible,  that 
God  does  not  approve  of  oppression  and  injustice, 
and  yet  God  makes  sin  the  punishment  of  sin. 
No  one  can  sinfully  injure  bis  neighbor  with 
God's  approbation:  and  yet  the  injury  he  does 
is  God's  providential  chastisement  of  transgres- 
sors.—W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  38.  Out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Most 
High  proceedeth  not  evil  and  good? — Goes 
not  out  of  t/if  mouth  of  the  Most  High  the  evil  and 
the  good?  If  there  is  no  one  who  is  able  to  make 
his  will  efficient  without  God's  permission,  then 
follows  necessarily  the  general  proposition,  that 


122 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


everything,  as  well  evil  as  good,  proceeds  from 
the  mouth  of  God,  i.  e.,  is  done  by  God's  com- 
mand. It  certainly  is  not  the  Poet's  intention 
here  to  suggest  any  reflections  on  the  origin  of 
moral  evil.  He  has  in  his  eye,  according  to  the 
whole  context,  only  the  contrast  of  prosperity 
and  adversity.  By  the  evil  he  means  physical 
evil  or  misfortune,  and  by  the  good — physical 
good  or  happiness.  And  although  misfortune  is 
frequently  a  consequence  of  moral  evil,  according 
to  vers.  34-36,  yet  lie  regards  this  consequence 
onlj'  with  reference  to  its  bearing  on  human  wel- 
fare, and  not  with  reference  to  its  causation. 
What  he  wishes  to  say  is,  that  the  Lord  permits 
wrong  and  violence,  as  well  as  those  actions  that 
tend  to  piomote  happiness,  in  order,  according 
as  His  purpose  may  be,  to  chastise  or  to  bless. 
But  he  did  not  intend  to  say  that  God  had  posi- 
tively willed  what  is  evil,  although  the  significa- 
tion of  evil  is  not  exhausted  in  the  idea  of 
chastisement. 

Ver.  39.  Since  happiness  and  misfortune  are 
both  equally  willed  of  God,  both  must  be  good, 
and  notliing  belonging  to  eitlier  of  them  should 
cause  us  to  murmur.  As  a  man  who  has  brought 
upon  himself  wholesome  sickness  by  means  of 
bitter  medicine,  ought  not  to  complain  of  that 
medicine,  but  should  blame  himself  for  having 
caused  the  necessity  of  using  it,  so  a  man  should 
not  complain  of  the  evils  which  befall  him,  for 
these  are  only  the  necessary  means  of  curing  the 
sickness  of  sin,  of  which  he  himself  is  guilty. 
If  he  will  lament,  let  him  lament  for  his  sin.  See 
Jer.  XXX.  15. — Wherefore  doth  a  living  man 
complain  (marg.,  7nurmur). — -For  what  sighs  the 
man  who  lives?  The  verb,  jJINj^n,  is  respirare, 
gemere,  to  sigh  with  the  kindred  idea  of  murmur- 
ing. Num.  xi.  1.  which  is  the  only  place  except 
this,  where  the  word  occurs.  The  expression  a 
living  man,  'PI  DIN,  is  difficult.  It  cannot  be 
taken,  with  Pakeau  and  Rosenmueller,  as 
synonymous  with  DIN,  a  man,  in  which  case  ''H. 
living,  would  be,  properly  speaking,  superfluous. 
Neither  can  it  be  taken  for  W^V\,  vita,  life,  in 
which  case  the  sense  would  be  eiir  queritur  homo 
vitam  scil.  calamitosam  (Maurer)  [why  complains 
man  of  life,  i.  e.,  because  it  is  calamitous]  ?  As 
little  can  it  be  called  as  long  as  he  lives  (J.  D. 
Michaelis);  ov,  although  he  lives,  since  he  yet 
lives  and  could  do  something  better  than  sigh 
(Ewald).  The  only  sense  corresponding  to  the 
context  is,  what  does  the  man  as  a  living  one  sigh 
for?  As  a  living  one,  i.  e.,  as  one  who  still  finds 
himself  in  this  life's  school  of  discipline.  How 
should  we  in  the  time  appointed  for  affliction 
mourn  over  our  alBictions  ?  A  living  man  should 
not  allow  himself  to  be  surprised  by  "  the  fiery 
trial  "  as  if  thereby  some  strange  thing  happened 
unto  him  (1  Peter  iv.  12) :  only  that  happens  to 
him  which  is  natural  and  inevitable.  A  man 
for  the  punishment  of  his  sins  ? — Evcrg  one 
on  account  of  his  sins.  This  can  only  be  the  an- 
swer to  the  question  proposed  in  tlie  first  member 
of  the  verse,  designed  to  rectify  the  evil  in  view, 
— not  sufferings,  but  sins  should  be  lamented. 

[The  difficulties  of  this  verse  are  great,  as  is 
evident  from  the  variety  of  translations  and  in- 
terpretations it  has  suffered.  Four  questions  are 
to  be    answered.     1.  The  meaning  of  the  verb 


rendered  C07nplain  or  murmur?  2.  The  force  of 
■'n,  living?  3.  The  sense  in  which  a  ?na7i,  13J, 
of  the  second  member  of  the  verse  is  to  be  taken? 
4.  Whether  the  whole  verse  composes  one  ques- 
tion, or  includes  a  question  and  a  responsive  ex- 
hortation or  a  question  and  a  simple  answer? — 1, 
The  meaning  of  the  verb  J JiN't"}"  ?  Aben  Ezra 
derived  it  from  |^X,  and  rendered  it  by  "^Pp,  to 
lie  (see  Calvin,  Fuerst,  Gerlach).  Hence 
Muenster,  taking  ver.  38  as  a  denial  of  Divine 
Providence,  explains  ver.  39  thus :  bhnphema 
hxc  vox  est  '■mentiturque  homo  in  peccatis  suis,' — 
this  is  a  blasphemous  saying  '  and  man  is  a  liar 
in  his  si7is '  (Gerlach).  Isaaki  derived  the  verb 
from  njX  (Fuerst).  From  this  root  possibly,  by 
some  far-fetched  analogy,  Broughton  brought 
his  unique  traijslation,  which  has  the  sole  merit 
of  relieving  us  of  the  difficulty  of  explaining  a 
living  man,  'F)  D1?s,  and  a  man,  1I3J,  by  making 
one  the  subject,  and  the  other  the  object  of  the 
verb, — tvhat  should  living  man  grudge  any  person 
after  his  sin?  But  what  this  means  the  learned 
Hebraist  has  not  explained.  Calvin  is  very 
positive  that  the  word  here  and  in  Numbers, 
means  to  weary  one^e  self.  "  Why  should  he  weary 
himself,  a  living  man,  and  a  man  in  his  sins?  for  as 
long  as  men  thus  remain  in  their  own  dregs,  they 
will  never  acknowledge  God  as  the  judge  of  the 
world,  and  thus  they  always  go  astray  through 
their  own  perverse  imaginations."  Others  ren- 
der it  in  a  similar  sense:  ^^  Why  doth  he  afflict 
himself  by  his  sins?  Why  doth  he  procure  evils 
to  himself  by  the  committing  of  sin?" — "  Why 
doth  he  vex  himself?  (to  wit,  by  impatient  car- 
riage under  God's  hand),  even  a  man  in  his  sin, 
persisting  still  in  the  same"  (see  Gataker). 
The  Versions  and  Lexicograpliers,  however,  with 
great  unanimity,  and  apparent  reason,  derive 
the  verb  from  jJX,  to  breathe  hard,  to  sigh,  and 
take  it  in  the  sense  oi  murmuring,  complaining,  as 
above.  There  is  no  room  to  doubt  that  this  is 
its  meaning.  2.  What  is  the  force  of  "'n.  Pareau 
and  Rosenmueller,  deny  that  this  word  is  em- 
phatic. They  claim  that  ^n,  alone,  is  used  for 
man,  referring  to  Ps.  cxliii.  2,  and  regard  DIN, 

'  °  '  °  TT 

added  here,  as  a  mere  redundancy  of  language 
by  Jeremiah,  who  was  not  chary  of  words,  ver- 
borum  non  parcior.  We  are  then  to  take  the  ex- 
pression living  man,  as  meaning  simply  a  man,  as 
we  often  say  living  man,  or  mortal  man  where  the 
adjective  is  superfluous  :  (Rosenmueller  trans- 
lates the  text  simply  mortalis.)  To  this  we 
answer  1.  The  word  ''n  in  Ps.  cxliii.  2,  is  em- 
phatic:— None  living,  i.  e.,  no  living  man  is  just, 
or  innocent  in  God's  sight.  The  inference  may 
be  allowed,  possibly  intended,  that  those  not  «ow 
living  may  have  passed  into  a  state  of  innocency 
in  God's  sight.  2.  The  position  of  the  word 
after  DIN  (reminding  us,  as  Naegelsbach  says, 

of  ''n  ^N,  see  gram,  note  above)  and  also  the 
accent  it  bears*  show  that  the  word  is  emphatic. 
In  this    case  it  is  difficult  to  assign    any  other 

*OwEN,  in  utter  violation  of  the  accents,  connects  'n  with. 
T3J,  and  translates. 

Why  complain  should  mun, 
Any  man  alive,  for  liis  ■'i;!  ? 


CHAP.  III.  34-39. 


123 


meaning  to  it,  than  that  which  Ewald  and  most 

commentators  do,  why  sighs  man  living,  i.  e.,  since 
he  lives.  Dr.  Naegklsbach  says  it  cannot  have 
this  meaning:  but  he  gives  no  reason  why  it 
cannot :  and  his  own  translation  involves  this 
sense,  {what  does  a  man  sigh  for  who  lives,  der  lebt?) 
while  his  explanation  in  the  commentary,  man  as 
a  living  one  [als  ein  Lebender),  "«.  e.,  as  one  who 
still  finds  himself  in  this  life's  school  of  dis- 
cipline," adds  to  the  original,  and  what  he  calls 
impossible  idea,  of  one  who  yet  lives,  another  and 
fanciful  notion  of  his  own.  Michaelis,  Ewald, 
Gerlach,  Blayney,  Boothroy^d,  Henderson 
and  Noyes,  all  agree  in  the  sense  which  our 
English  Version  seems  to  suggest,  which  Words- 
worth also  adopts  and  explains  thus:  "Where- 
fore does  a  man,  whose  life  is  still  spared  by 
God's  mercy,  and  to  whom,  therefore,  the  door 
of  repentance  and  pardon  is  not  yet  closed,  mur- 
mur (see  Num.  xi.  1,  where  the  same  word, 
literally  signifying  to  breathe  hard,  is  used),  in- 
stead of  using  his  breath  and  life  in  order  to  pray 
for  forgiveness,  and  to  amend  his  practice  ?"' 
3.  In  what  sense  are  we  to  take  ^3J,  a  man,  in 
the  second   member  of  the  verse?     While   mx 

T  T 

is  the  generic  name  for  man  in  the  widest 
sense,  "ipj  is  supposed  to  be  a  more  distinctive 
and  honorable  designation,  as  implying  a  man 
possessed  of  manly  qualities.  Some  suppose 
that  it  is  used  emphatically  here  in  this  sense, 
as  Blayney  suggests.  Since  most  languages 
have  a  variety  of  words  signifying  man,  most 
of   the   Versions  render  DIN  of  the  first  mem- 

TT 

ber,  and  ^3J  of  the  second,  by  terms  of  cor- 
responding significance,  as  if  intending  to  ex- 
press an  emphasis  in  the  last  term, — av&puirog, 
avf/p ;  homo,  vir;  Mensch,  Mann, — a  distinction 
that  seems  to  be  aimed  at  in  English  in  a 
version  given  by  Gataker,  Why  should  a 
living  wight  complain,  or  murmur,  any  7nan  for  his 
sin  ?  This  distinction,  if  intended,  would  give 
a  good  sense.  Why  should  a  living  man,  a  truly 
manly  man  murmur  at  the  punishment  of  his  sins? 
The  Arabic  gives  the  following  sense:  He  who 
dissolves  himself  in  lamentations  and  sighs,  is  a  iveak 
man;  the  strong  man  is  ashamed  of  his  sins  {Prediger- 
Bible).  Corn.  Van  Waenen,  according  to  Rosen- 
mueller,  inferred  from  the  Arabic  that  'n  has 
the  sense  of  being  affected  with  shame,  and  joining 
it  to  13il  in  spite  of  the  strong  disjunctive  accent, 
translated  thus:  Why  does  the  mean  man  [homo 
vilis)  dissolve  himself  in  lamentations?  The  noble 
man  [vir  nobilis)  will  restrain  himself  for  shame  on 
account  of  his  crimes.  But  there  are  no  proofs  or 
analogies  for  this  strongly  contrasted  use  of 
DnN  and  "131     We  can,  however,  take  "^JJ  here, 

T  T 

as  Dr.  Naegelsbach  does,  in  a  sense  thatC'"'X  often 
has,  of  every  one,  each  man  individually  consid- 
ered. See  Joel  ii.  8;  Jer.  xvii.  5,  7;  Jos.  vii.  14, 17, 
18;  1  Chron.  xxiii.  3.  There  are  many  other  pas- 
sages where  the  word  may  be  rendered  every  man 
or  every  one.  Gesenius  gives  it  this  meaning  in 
our  text.  This  rendering  prevents  the  necessity 
of  breaking  up  the  verse  into  two  separate  and 
distinct  members.  4.  Does  the  whole  verse  in- 
clude a  single  question?  Many  versions  take 
the  first  member  as  a  question,  and  the  second 


as  a  responsive  exhortation.    So  the  old  Geneva, 

which  Noyes  adopts  :  Wherefore  then  murmureth 
the  living  man?  Let  him  murmur  at  his  own  sins! 
Gerlach's  objections  to  this  are  well  taken. 
The  antithesis  would  then  require  that  in  the 
question  some  cause  of  murmuring  should  be 
stated,  which  the  prophet  would  indicate  as  an 
improper  one  ;  as,  'Wiierefore  murmureth  living 
man  on  account  of  his  misfortunes  ?  Let  him  mur- 
mur on  account  of  his  sins.'  It  may  be  said  that 
the  cause  may  easily  be  inferred  from  the  con- 
text. Still  it  would  seem  strange  that  such  an 
important  antithesis  was  not  distinctly  expressed. 
Besides,  this  rendering  makes  it  necessary,  not 
only  to  repeat  the  verb  contained  in  the  first 
member  and  not  expressed  in  the  second,  but  to 
change  it  from  the  Indicative  mood  to  the  Imper- 
ative, why  does  he  murmur,  let  him  murmur.  These 
difiiculties  are  overcome  by  taking  tlie  verse  as 
a  question  and  a  simple  answer,  not  expressed 
in  a  hortatory  form.  So  Dr.  Naegelsbach  :  Why 
does  the  man  who  lives  mourn  ?  Every  one  on 
account  of  his  sins.  So  Maurer,  quoted  by  Ger- 
lach, quidi.  e.,  cur  queritur  homo  dum  vivit  ?  Unus- 
quisque  ob  peccata  sua.  Ilinc  illse  lacrymse ! 
Pcccatis  sibi  quisque  contraxit  de  quibus  queritur 
mala.  "  Why  does  man  mourn  whilst  he  lives  ? 
Every  one  on  account  of  his  sins.  Hence  those 
tears  !  By  his  sins  each  one  has  brought  on  him- 
self the  evils  he  complains  of."  A  great  objection 
to  dividing  this  verse  into  question  and  answer 
is,  that  it  mars  the  rhythmical  parallelism  which 
is  a  peculiar  feature  of  this  poem  [see  Intr.,  Add. 
Rem.,  p.  23],  and  quite  destroys  the  remarkable 
and  beautiful  symmetry  between  the  several 
verses  of  each  triplet,  which  prevails  in  this  part 
of  the  poem.  For  the  same  reason  that  each  verse 
in  this  triplet  should  be  a  question,  if  one  is,  each 
verse  ought  to  contain  a  question  and  an  answer, 
if  one  does, — or  else  each  v^erse  should  form  an 
entire  question  by  itself.  Besides,  the  connec- 
tion seems  to  require  such  a  construction.  The 
declarations  that  God  does  not  inflict  evil  will- 
ingly,  from  His  heart,  that  He  does  not  look  with 
favor  on  oppression  and  injustice,  and  yet  that 
nothing  comes  to  pass  without  His  permission, 
whether  it  be  evil  or  good,  prepares  us  for  the 
question.  Why  then  does  man  murmur  when  he 
suffers  in  the  righteous  Providence  of  God  for 
hig  sins  ?  Why  should  living  man — man  whose 
life  is  mercifully  spared — complain  or  murmur, 
every  one  on  account  of  his  sins,  i.  e.,  of  the  effects 
of  his  sins?  The  idea  of  dividing  the  sentence 
into  a  question  and  response  arose,  undoubtedly, 
from  the  difficulty  of  taking  13J  in  the  usual 
sense  of  a  man.  But  by  rendering  it  every  one, 
and  remembering  that  DIX  is  generic,  like  homo, 
av\}puT7oc,  Mensch,  and  can  be  best  expressed  in 
English  by  men,  as  even  in  German  Luther 
rendered  it,  Wie  murren  denn  die  Leute  im 
Lebeu  also?  the  apparent  difficulty  of  construc- 
tion entirely  disappears.  Why  should  living  men 
complain  or  murmur,  every  one  on  account  of  his  sins  ? 
There  can  be  no  valid  objection  to  understanding 
sins  as  put  for  their  efl^ects,  the  sufferings  or 
punishment  they  involve.  So  most  of  the  ver- 
sions and  interpreters.  Or  we  can  take  sin  in  the 
sense  of  guilt,  liability  to  punishment.  Worps- 
WORTH  :     "  Literally,  for  hi»  sins — for  his  own 


124 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


fault.  Why  does  the  sinner  murmur  at  God  for  I  See  what  follows." — The  Future  form  of  the  verb 
that  which  he  has  brought  on  himself  by  his  own  implies  here  a  conditional  sense,  why  thould,  etc. 
sin,  and  which  may  be  removed  by  repentance  ?    — W.  H.  H.] 


III.  40-42. 

40  Let  us  search  and  try  our  ways,  and  turn  again  lo  the  Lord.     Let  us  lift 

41  up  our  heart  with  our  hands  unto  God  in  the  heavens.     We  have  transgressed 

42  and  have  rebelled :  thou  hast  not  pardoned. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Yer.  40. — jJ'Sn,  perfodere,  pervestigare,  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah.    See  Ps.  Ixiv.  7 ;  Prov.  ii.  4 ;  xx.  27. — "IpH,  fodere, 

-  T  1-T 

eruere.,  perscrutari,  occurs  in  Jer.  xvii.  10;  xxxi.  37. — [Gerlach  :  "  The  LXX  have  taken  the  forms  HlS'Snj  and  n^pDJ 

T  :   :  -  t:I    ;  - 

for  fern.  part,  niph."] — ^^  is  emphatic,  Ewald,  §217,  e.  let  us  go  back,  not  half  way,  but  the  whole.    [Rosenmueller  and 

Thenius  deny  that  it  is  emphatic,  and  represent  it  as  equivalent  to  7K-    Gerlach  agrees  with  Naegelsbach,  and  refers 

to  Hos.  xiv.  2, 3,  where  both  prepositions  stand  side  by  side  with  a  difference  of  meaning  not  to  be  mistaken.] 

Ver.  41.— 7X  is  cumulative,  as  Lev.  xviii.  18;  Ez.  xliv.  7.     [AlsoEz.  vii.  26.    The  unusual  use  of  this  preposition  led 

the  Rabbins  to  fanciful  interpretations  of  the   text.     Some   have  put  upon  it  the  mystical  sense,  lift  up  our  heart  to 

our  hands,  in  order  to  second  prayer  with  practice,  (Qatakbr). — W.  H.  H.] — 337     Xit'J  occurs  only  here.     Wn^ji    jH 

T  ••  T    T  .    _   ^  _  .. 

occurs  not  in  Jer.     See  Deut.  iii.  24 ;  1  Kings  viii.  23. 

Ver.  42. — ^Jfl^i  only  occurs  six  times  in  the  Old  Testament,  viz.,   besides  here,   Gen.  xlii.  11;  Ex.  xvi.  7,  8;  Num. 

xxxii.  33 ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  12,  seems  to  be  choseu  here  only  for  the  sake  of  the  acrostic.    [Very  likely  ;  yet,  as  a  master  of 

art,  the  Poet  has  made  the  necessity  of  the  choice  subserve  the  force  and  beauty  of  thought  and  expression.     ^JPJ  and 

:  T 
nnXi  t>oth  expressed,  are  emphatic  and  antithetical. — W.  H.  H.]— ytyj  in  Jer.  ii.  8,29;  iii.  13,  etc. — 7T^0>  See  i.  18,  20; 

T-  ■  -T  TT 

Jer.  iv.  17,  v.  23. — H/D,  frequently  in  Jer.  v.  1,  7;  xxxi.  34,  etc. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  39  constitutes  the  transition  to  something 
new.  If  there  must  be  sighing,  let  it  be  sighing 
over  sin  says  ver.  39.  This  exhortation  is  re- 
sponded to  in  vers.  40-42,  for  these  cont.ain  a 
penitential  lamentation  of  the  people  for  their 
sins.  This  shows  that  our  explanation  of  the 
last  member  of  ver.  39  is  right.  For,  unless 
XCOn,  sm,  be  talien  in  the  entirely  unadmissible 
sense  of  j9Mm.sAme«<  (Meier,  Ewald),  [E.  V.  See 
notes  on  ver.  39],  tliat  second  member  of  ver.  39 
cannot  be  taken  as  a  continuation  of  the  ques- 
tion, but  only  in  the  sense  of  an  affirmatory 
restriction,  as  we  have  done.  It  is  to  be  observed, 
moreover,  thit  the  Poet  here  again  spealts  in 
the  first  pprsoii  plural.  We  have  shown  above, 
at  ver.  22  (0?i3)>  that  the  consoling  hope,  de- 
clared in  the  passage  beginning  with  ver.  22, 
rests  directly  upon  tiie  fact  that  the  people  is  not 
extinct,  that  there  is  yet  a  kernel  remaining 
which  can  serve  as  a  point  of  connection  for  the 
restoration.  After  the  Poet,  on  the  ground  of 
this  matter  of  fact,  which  he  regarded  as  a  pledge 
for  the  continuance  of  Divine  grace,  had  made 
known  his  hope,  and  declared  likewise  his  con- 
victions that  suflFerings  were  no  real  misfortune, 
and  that  not  on  their  account,  but  for  sin,  should 
men  sigh,  it  is  entirely  natural  that  he  utters  the 
penitential  lamentation,  enjoined  in  ver.  39,  not 
in  his  own  name  alone,  but  in  that  of  the  whole 
people.  For  the  suflFerings,  of  which  he  had 
before  spoken,  were  not  in  fact  punishments  for 
his  sins;  but  they  were  the  righteous  chastise- 
ment of  the  sin  of  the  whole  people.     The  whole 


people  then  has  to  join  in  the  penitential  lamen- 
tation, which  the  Poet  begins  to  sing  in  ver.  40. 

Ver.  40.  All  true  penitence  must  begin  with 
acknowledgment  of  sin.  But  the  knowledge  of 
sin  with  men  is  the  result  of  candid  self-exami- 
nation. Therefore,  the  penitential  lamentation 
of  the  people  begins  with  an  exhortation  to  self- 
examination.  Let  us  search  and  try  our 
ways.  Let  us  examine  our  ways  and  search.  [In- 
stead of  murmuring  against  God,  let  us  examine 
and  search  our  conduct  for  the  causes  of  God's 
displeasure  and  our  misfortunes,  in  order  to  cor- 
rect them. — W.  H.  H.]. — And  turn  again  to 
the  LORD. — And  return  to  Jehovah.  The  pre- 
position in  the  Hebrew  is  forcible.  [See  Gram. 
note  above].  Let  us  go,  not  half  way  back,  but 
all  the  way  back  to  Jehovah.  Such  a  half-way 
return  was,  for  example,  the  Reformation  under 
Josiah  ;  see  Jer.  iv.  1-4,  and  the  remarks  at  that 
place.  This  idea  of  returning  to  Jehovah,  as  is 
well  known,  plays  a  very  conspicuous  role  in 
Jeremiah  ;  see  iii.  1,  4, 12  ;  viii.  4,  5 ;  xxxi.  16-22, 
and  the  comments  on  those  passages.  [Hender- 
son :  "  From  the  assumption  of  the  plural  in  this 
and  the  immediately  following  verses,  it  is  obvi- 
ous that,  in  those  which  just  precede,  Jeremiah 
has  in  view  the  punishment  to  which  the  Jews, 
as  a  people,  were  subjected."] 

Ver.  41.  Let  us  lift  up  our  heart  with— 
together  with  —  our  hands  unto  God  in  the 
Heavens. — Without  the  lifting  up  of  heart  and 
hands  to  God  there  is  naturally  no  right  return 
to  God  imaginable.  [Calvin:  "He  bids  u-< 
banish  all  hypocrisy  from  our  prayers.  *  * 
When  affliction  comes,  it  is  a  common  thing  with 
all  to  raise  up  their  hands  to  heaven,  though  no 


CHAP.  111.  43-6G. 


12i 


•ne  should  bid  them  to  do  so ;.  but  still  their 
hearts  remain  fixed  on  the  earth,  and  they  come 
not  to  God.  *  *  As  prayers,  when  they  are 
earnest,  move  the  hands,  our  Prophet  refers  to 
that  practice  as  useful.  At  the  same  time  he 
teaches  us  that  the  chief  thing  ought  not  to  be 
omitted,  even  to  raise  up  the  hearts  to  God  ;  Let 
us,  then,  he  says,  rceiee  up  our  hearts  together  with 
our  hands  to  God:  and,  he  adds,  to  God  luho  in 
in  Heaven :  for  it  is  necessary  that  men  should 
rise  up  above  the  world  and  go  out  o)  themselves, 
so  to  speak,  in  order  to  come  to  God."  It  should 
not  be  overlooked  that  the  Prophet  connects  the 
outward  forms  of  expression  with  the  heart's 
sincerity  as  constituting  the  prayer  of  true  peni- 
tence. There  is  nothing  here  to  encourage  those 
to  think  that  they  pray,  who  discard  the  attitude 
and  gestures  and  even  words  of  prayer,  and  fancy 
that  they  pray  in  their  hearts.  That  prayer  is 
an  unuttered  desire,  a  trembling  emotion  of  the 
soul,  a  sigh,  a  tear,  the  glancing  of  an  eye, — are 
only  poetical  truths,  and,  in  plain  prose,  are 
only  half-truths,  and,  as  sometimes  understood, 
half- falsehoods.  The  Bible  never  separates  the 
prayer  of  the  heart  from  its  formal  expression 
in  words  and  acts. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  42.  The  first  half  of  the  verse  attains  the 
summit  of  the  succession  of  thoughts  begun  in 
ver.  40,  and  to  which  the  path  was  broken  in  ver. 
39. — We  have  transgressed  and  rebelled. 
—  We  have  sinned  and  have  been  disobedient.  \_Re- 
belled  is  a  better  rendering.  The  pronoun  we, 
doubly  expressed  in  the  original,  as  the  first 
word  in  the  sentence  and  in  the  forms  of  the 
verb,  "  is  here  emphatical,  as  though  the  faith- 
ful had  taken  on  themselves  the  blame  of  all  the 
evils,  which  the  greater  part  ever  sought  to  dis- 
own" (Calvin).  Owen:  "To  give  the  proper 
emphasis  to  the  pronoun,  the  version  ought  to 
be  as  follows,  We,  transgressed  have  we,  and  re- 


belled.''— W.  H.  H.] — By  these  words  the  exhor- 
tation contained  in  last  clause  of  ver.  39  is  com- 
plied with,  for  they  are  the  expression  of  a  deep 
and  sincere  grief  for  sin.  The  second  half  of 
the  verse  constitutes,  in  a  way  similar  to  that 
of  the  last  clause  of  ver.  39,  the  transition  to 
what  follows.  For  the  words — Thou  hast  not 
pardoned — constitute  an  intermediate  member 
between  the  two  statements,  which  have  respec- 
tively lor  their  subjects,  guilt  and  punishment. 
Guilt  is  followed  with  punishment,  if  not  par- 
doned. That  it  is  not  pardoned  in  the  present 
instance,  this  last  clause  of  the  verse  declares. — 
Observe  the  pronouns  answering  to  each  other. 
We — Thou.  [Both  doubly  expressed  in  the  He- 
brew. Both,  therefore,  emphatic. — W.  H.  H.] — 
Hence  it  is  evident  that  the  Poet  does  not  wish 
to  reproach  the  Lord,  but,  on  the  contrary,  to 
make  His  proceedings  conspicuous.  [Henderson: 
"  The  confession  is  supposed  to  be  made  while 
the  exile  still  continued.  There  is  implied  a 
fervent  hope,  that  now  it  was  made,  the  captivity 
would  be  reversed." — The  breaking  up  of  this 
verse  into  two  distinct  separate  propositions  is 
not  such  an  injury  to  the  versification  as  was 
deprecated  in  ver.  39.  Because  we  have  now 
passed  the  section  where  the  symmetrical  unifor- 
i.iity  of  the  verses  was  to  be  preseived:  because, 
again,  this  verse  is  a  real  transition  to  what  fol- 
lows, with"  which  it  is  so  intimately  connected 
that  Gerlach  begins  the  new  section  with  ver. 
40:  because,  again,  the  We,  ^JHJ,  and  Thou, 
nn5<,  preserve  a  perfect  antithesis,  and  give  us 

a  parallelism  in  sentiments  as  well  as  in  rhythm 
and  because,  finally,  the  poetical  effect  of  this 
abrupt  appeal  to  God,  like  the  sudden  outburst 
at  the  end  of  i.  11,  See,  0  Jehovah,  and  consider, 
justifies  the  departure  from  the  stricter  forma  of 
construction. — W   H.  H.] 


PART  III. 


III.  43-66. 

D  Ver.  43.  Thou  didst  cover  Thyself  with  wrath  and  pursue  ub, 

Thou  didst  slay ,^— Thou  didst  not  pity. 
D  Ver.  44.  Thou  didst  cover  Thyself  with  clouds 

So  that  no  prayer  could  pass  through, 
D  Ver.  45.  Thou  madest  us  offscourings  and  refuse 

In  the  midst  of  the  nations. 
£)  Ver.  46.  All  our  enemies 

Gaped  at  us  with  their  mouth. 
£3  Ver.  47.  Terror  and  the  pit  came  upon  us — 

Desolation  and  destruction. 
£3  Ver.  48.  Mine  eye  runneth  down  with  streams  of  water 

For  the  ruin  of  the  daughter  of  my  people. 
^  Ver.  49.  Mine  eye  overfloweth  unceasingly, 

Without  intermission, 
J?  Ver.  50.  Until  Jehovah  from  Heaven 

Look  down  and  behold. 


126  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


y  Ver.  51.  Mine  eye  paineth  my  soul 

Because  of  all  the  daughters  of  my  city. 
V  Ver.  52.  They  that  were  without  cause  my  enemies 

Hunted  me  down  like  a  bird. 
y  Ver.  53.  They  destroyed  in  the  pit  my  life 

And  cast  a  stone  over  me. 
^  Ver.  54.  Waters  flowed  upon  my  head. 

I  said, — I  am  lost! 
p  Ver.  55.  I  called  upon  thy  name,  O  Jehovah, 

Out  of  the  depths  of  the  pit. 
p  Ver.  56.  Thou  heardest  my  cry — hide  not  Thine  ear 

From  my  prayer  for  relief! 
p  Ver.  57.  Thou  drewest  near  on  the  day  when  I  called  to  Thee  \ 

Thou  saidst, — Fear  not! 
"1  Ver.  58.  Thou  didst  espouse  the  causes  of  my  soul, 

Thou  didst  rescue  my  life. 
"1  Ver.  59.  Thou,  O  Jehovah,  hast  seen  the  wrong  done  to  me. 

Judge  Thou  my  cause. 
"l  Ver.  60.  Thou  hast  seen  all  their  vengeance, 

All  their  devices  against  me. 
^  Ver.  61.  Thou  hast  heard  their  revilings,  O  Jehovah, 

All  their  devices  against  me. 
£5^  Ver.  62.  The  lips  of  my  enemies  and  their  thoughts 

Against  me,  all  the  day  long, 
JJ^  Ver.  63.  Their  sitting  down  and  rising  up,  observe  Thou; 

I  am  their  song! 
n  Ver.  64.  Render  to  them  a  recompence,  O  Jehovah, 

According  to  the  work  of  their  hands. 
n  Ver,  65.  Give  them  blindness  of  heart. 

Thy  curse  on  them ! 
n  Ver.  66.  Pursue  them  in  wrath  and  exterminate  them 

From  under  the  Heaven  of  Jehovah. 


ANALYSIS. 

The  third  part,  verp.  43-66,  is  to  be  compared  to  the  night  returning  again  after  the  day.  From  ver.  48 
to  ver.  48,  the  Poet  speaks  in  the  first  person  plural.  The  whole  people  unite  in  describing  the  severe 
calamity  suffered  on  account  of  God's  wrath.  From  ver.  48  to  the  end,  the  Poet  again  speaks  in  the 
first  person  singular.  But  in  the  first  part  of  this  passage,  in  vers.  48-51,  the  common  misfortune  is 
ttill  the  subject  of  his  lamentation.  He  begins  again  to  speak  of  himself  in  ver.  52.  He  first  describes, 
vers.  52-54,  the  terrible  ill-treatment  suffered  at  the  hands  of  men,  according  to  Jer.  xxxviii.  6. 
Vers.  55-66  contain  a  prayer,  so  that  this  Song,  as  well  as  the  first  and  second,  closes  with  a  prayer. 
This  prayer  is  in  three  parts.  Vers.  55-58,  thanks  for  deliverance  from  the  grave.  Vers.  59-63.  a 
statement  of  all  the  injur g  which  his  enemies  had  done,  and  were  constantly  doing  to  the  Prophet. 
Vers.  64-66,  a  prayer  for  righteous  vengeance.  The  symmetry  of  the  external  form,  which  we  have 
observed  in  the  middle  section  of  the  Song,  is  wanting  here,  as  it  is  also  in  the  first  part  of  the  Song. 
For  according  to  the  sense,  first,  five  verses  are  connected  together,  vers.  43-47  ;  then,  four,  vers.  48- 
51  ;  then,  three,  vers.  52-54  ;  finally,  twelve,  which  are  again  separated  into  subdivisions  of  four, 
five  and  three  verses.  The  articulations  of  the  discourse  no  longer  correspond  with  the  triplets  of 
verses :  neither  is  the  symmetry  of  the  initial  words  carried  out. 

A$  the  evening  twilight  gradually  deepens  in(o  night,  so  the  discourse  of  our  Poet  passes  over  from  the  bright 
day-light  of  consolation,  which  irradiates  the  nohle  central  section  of  our  book,  back  again  into  the 
gloomy  description  of  those  sufferings  with  which  Israel  and  the  Prophet  of  the  Lord  were  punished. 
We  stand  at  the  threshold  of  the  last  of  the  three  sections  of  the  third  Song.  If  not  exactly,  yet  al- 
most exactly  has  the  Poet  distributed  the  lights  and  shadows,  so  that  the  first  and  the  last  of  the  three 
parts  contain  the  shadows,  ana  the  second  one  affords  the  light.  For  of  the  66  verses  of  the  chapter, 
22  constitute  a  third  part.  But  the  middle  section,  after  the  transition  verses,  19-21,  extends  from  \er. 
22  to  ver.  40,  after  which  vers.  40-42  follow  as  another  transition,  corresponding  tothe  first  one  as  the 
evening  twilight  does  to  the  dawning  of  the  morning.  If  we  add  both  of  these  transition  passages  to  the 
middle  section,  then  the  first  of  the  three  sections  consists  of  18,  the  second  of  24,  and  the  last  again  of 
24  verses. 


CHAP.  III.  43-47. 


127 


III.  43-47. 

43  Thou  hast  covered  with  anger,  and  persecuted  us :  thou  hast  slain,  thou  hast  not 

44  pitied.     Thou  hast  covered  thyself  with  a  cloud,  that  our  prayer  should  not  pass 

45  through.     Thou  hast  made  us  as  the  ofFscouring  and  refuse  in  the  midst  of  the  peo- 
46,  47  pie.     All  our  enemies  have  opened  their  mouths  against  us.     Fear  and  a  snare 

is  come  upon  us,  desolations  and  destruction. 

TEXTUAL    AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  43. — ^DD,  which  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiali,  is  used  as  a  direct  causative,  as  afterwards,  ver.  44;  See  Ps.  cxl.  8. 
[Gerlach  :  "Gesenius  rftes.,  and  Otto  take  'HDD  as  a  reflective  verb."  Otto,  quoted  by  Rosenmuellbr,  says  .4i  reciprose 
verbum  "^20  usurpari  posse,  nondubium  ;  but  he  prefers  here  to  supply  nos  as  the  object  of  the  verb.  To  make  the  pron. 
suf.  in  ^ JDT^jl  the  object  of  7]3D,  however,  is  impossible,  since  the  latter,  when  it  has  the  meaning  otcoeering,  is  always 
construed  with  7j;,  or  7  affixed  to  its  object. — W.  H.  H.] — nX3,  see  Jer.  xxi.  5.— [5<S-  Hendersox:  "Upwards  of  eighty 
MSS.,  twelve  printed  editions,  the  Alex,  copy  of  the  LXX.,  the  Arab.,  Syr.,  Vulg.  and  Targ ,  read  X/V"] 

Ver.  44.— Jeremiah  uses  only  the  plural  of  rjy,  and  that  only  once,  iv.  13.— plSsp   IIDyO,  for  the  construction,  see 

Itt  t-    :  -:|-- 

my  Gr.,  §  106,  6.     [The  preposition  JO  is  very  peculiarly  used  as  a  negative.    When  the  idea  oi  motion  from  a  place  is  in- 
volved, then  that  which  is  denied  is  connected  with  the  verb  simply  by  JO.    Naegelsbach's  Gr.,  J  106,  6.] 

Ver.  45. — ^nO  from  nnD>  dete/rgere,  everrere,  Esr.  xxvl.  4,  is  sioeepings,  dirt.  It  occurs  only  here.  [In  Is.  v.  25  we  have 
nn^D,  sweeping,  refuse,  filth  (J.  A.  Alexander). — W.  H.  H.]— ^IXO,  as  a  substantive,  only  here.    See  Ewald,  Z  240,  a — 

T  T 

Jeremiih  expresses  the  thought  contained  in  this  verse  in  another  fiishion,  see  xv.  4  ;  xxiv.  9:  xxix.  18;  xxxiv.  17  ;  xlii. 
18. — D'S  Vn  3np3  seems  to  imply  the  dispersion  of  Israel  amoug  the  nations.     ^Ipi  is  nowhere  found  in  Jeremiah,  he 

always  uses  instead  ^in3,  xii.  16 ;  xxix.  ,32;  xl.  1;  xli.  8,  ete.;  once  only  he  uses  2TpO,  vi.  1,  and  Besides  21p3  with  suf- 
fixes frequently  iv.  14  ;  xiv.  9  ;  xxiii.  9.«te.     [Certainly  then  J1p3  is  not  foreign  to  ins  style. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  47.— nnSI  1113  is  a  quotation  from  Jer.  xlviii.  43;  Is.  xxiv.  11  .—'S'ZWTW  nXK^H-  The  paronomasia,  an  imita- 
tion of  jinDI  inD,  is  an  invention  of  our  Poet,  for  it  is  found  only  here.— PXl!',  apparently  from  nXt^i  tumultuari,  strepere, 

is  contracted  from  J^Xty.     In  Num.  xxiv.  17,  is  found  r\V-    The  meaning  seems  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  JlXty,  strepitus, 

■  "■■  ■■  I        T 

tumuUus.    See  JlXtJ'  'J3,  Jor.  xlviii.  45,  and  the  remarks  at  that  place.    Also  '^2V^  "Vl!,  Is.  lix.  7 ;  Ix.  18.— l^I^;,  see  ver. 

48 ;  ii.  11,  13;  iv.  10,  is  very  frequent  with  Jeremiah,  iv.  20  ;  vi.  14;  viii.  11,  21,  etc. 


EXEGETICAL    AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  43.  Thou  hast  covered  •with  anger, 
and  persecuted  us.  —  Thou  mndest  out  of 
Thy  wrath  a  veil  [or  covering]  and  didst  pur.tue 
us.  As  Thou  hast  not  pardoned,  ver.  42,  consti- 
tutes a  negative  term  of  connection,  so  does  Than, 
madest  a  covering  of  Thy  wrath  a  positive  oik'. 
For  the  veil  of  wrath  with  which  the  Lord  covers 
Himself,  conceals  in  its  bosom  the  lightnings  of 
wrath  of  which  the  Poet  proceeds  to  speak.  [Tlie 
causative  meaning  given  to  the  verb  by  Ur.  NAii- 
GELSBACH,  and  implied,  though  not  affiimed  liy 
Geri,ach,  is  certainly  possible  (see  Ps.  xci.  4, 
■!|7  ^p'  ipl3X3,  lit.,  With  his  wing  He  toill  make, 
or  provide,  .1.  A.  Alexander,  a  covering  for  thee), 
and  is  sirongly  recommended  here  by  tiie  absence 
of  an  otyect  expressed.  He  made  a  covering  of  the 
wrath  and  pursued  xis,  is  the  same  as  saying,  He 
enveloped  Himself  in  His  wrath  and  pursued  us. 
The  detiuite  article  before  ivrath,  the  wrath,  points 
to  .Jehovah's  wrath,  and  makes  the  reflective 
force  of  the  verb  more  apparent.  In  the  next 
verse,  vvliere  the  cloud  does  not  specify  any  par- 
ticular cloud,  but  only  clouds  generically,  the  ex- 
pression of  "Y),  for  Thyself,  is  more  elegant. 
These  slight  grammatical  distinctions  can  hardly 
be  expressed  in  English,  in  which  it  is  best  to  give  j 
the  b.ime  form  in  both  verses. — The  purpose  of  | 
the  covering  is  not  that  ot  concealment,  but  of  pre-  | 
paration  for  the  pursuit  of  His  enemies.     He  | 


dismisses  His  pity  and  gathers  His  wrath  around 
Him  as  a  veil  that  covers  the  whole  person,  that 
He  may  sZrtfj/ and  not  pity.  Or  His  wrath  itself 
may  be  regarded  as  furnishing  His  weapons  of 
ofi"ence,  the  armory  out  of  which  flash  the  light- 
nings of  His  wrath.  Therefore  the  objection  of 
J.  D.  MicHAELis,  BoETTCHER  and  Thenius,  that 
\  he  %oho  conceals  himself,  does  not  pursue  others  (al- 
though a  concealed  enemy  may,  nevertheless,  be 
a  pursuer),  is  not  valid.  We  must  either  take 
the  verb  in  a  causative  or  reflective  sense,  or  sup- 
ply ^7,  Thyself,  from  the  next  verse.  This  last 
'is  exceedingly  awkward.  If  the  order  of  the 
verses  was  reversed,  this  might  be  tolerated, 
though  even  then  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  usual 
independent  completeness  of  each  separate  verse 
in  the  Lamentations.  But  to  say  "Thou  didst 
cover  with  wrath  " — and  then  hold  the  mind  in 
suspense,  as  to  the  object  covered,  till  it  is  an- 
nounced in  the  next  verse,  is  awkward  to  say  the 
least,  and  certainly  has  the  effect,  as  Thenius 
asserts,  of  throwing  all  that  follows  the  word 
wrath  into  a  parenthesis. — Our  English  Version 
and  others  which  make  us,  at  the  end  of  the  verse, 
the  object  of  the  covering  cannot  be  correct  if  the 
verb  is  here  used  intlie  sense  of  coycrm^(  see  Gram, 
note  above).  Some  old  expositors,  alluded  to  by 
Gataker,  take  the  verb  in  the  sense  oih&\ng  hedged 
in.  Blayney  and  Owen  take  it  in  this  sense,  and 
suppose  an  allusion  to  the  practice  of  hunters, 
who  surrounded  their  game  with  toils,  and  then 
attacked  them.      Thou  hast  fenced  in  with   anger 


125 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


and  chased  us  (Blayney).  Thou  hast  in  wrath 
enclosed  us  and  chased  us  (Owen).  But  how  can 
there  be  an  allusion  to  this  practice  of  hunters 
in  the  next  verse,  where  they  give  the  verb  the 
eame  meaning, — Thou  hast  enclosed  Thyself  in  a 
cloud  (Owen)  ?  Henderson  also,  without  allusion 
to  hunting  however,  gives  the  verb  in  both  verses 
a  similar  meaning,  Thou  hast  shut  us  up  in  anger, 
—  Thou  hast  shut  Thyself  up  in  a  cloud.  But  the 
Hebrew  verb  when   followed  by  the  preposition 

7,  to,  prefixed  to  the  pronoun,  as  it  is  in  the  next 
verse,  certainly  means  covering  one's  self  with 
something,  as  with  a  garment  or  a  veil.  See  vev. 
44,  note.  Hence  it  is  best  to  take  it  in  flie  same 
sense  in  this  verse. — W.  H.  H.] — Thou  hast 
slain,  thou  hast  not  pitied. — Thou  didst  kill 
without  mercy.  [The  E.  V.  is  more  literal.  Many 
versions  have  spared,  instead  of  pitied.  The  latter 
meaning  is  better  here,  and  the  more  usual  sig- 
nification of  the  verb  when  not  joined  to  a  pre- 
position. See  ii.  2,  17. — W.  H.  H.]  See  ii.  21. 
Here  begins  the  enumeration  of  the  aggressive 
acts  of  the  Divine  punishment,  through  which 
the  wrath,  as  it  were,  spent  itself.  See  ver.  66 ; 
i.  6;   Jer.  xxix.  18,  etc. 

Ver.  44.  Thou  hast  covered  thyself  with 
a  cloud,  that  our  prayer  should  not  pass 
through. — Thou  madest  of  the  cloud  a  covering  for 
Thyself  that  no  prayer  could  pass  throtigh.     See  at 

ver.  8.  The  twice  recurring  verb  nmJD,  thou 
coveredst,  has  been  difi"erently  interpreted.  Ewald 
would  take  what  follows  the  word  wrath,  in  ver. 
43,  as  a  parenthesis.  But  these  words  closely 
connected  with  what  precedes  by  1  consecutive, 
contain  no  mere  secondary  thought.  Others 
(LuTUER,  Thenius)  translate.  Thou  hast  covered 
[overwhelmed)  us  with  wrath.  But  the  verb  has 
always  and  only  the  meaning  of  friendly  shelter- 
ing, veiling  or  covering:  and  further,  in  that 
case  we  would  expect  at  least  ^N3  [instead  of 
pN!l,  with  wrath,  instead  of  with  thewrath'].  But, 
aside  from  the  constraint  put  upon  the  Poet  by 
the  alphabetical  arrangement  [inducing  him  to 
repeat  the  same  word  for  the  sake  of  the  initial 
letter],  I  think  that  two  grades  or  kinds  of  cover- 
ing are  indicated.  Tiie  first  was  that,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  persecution  and  war  came  upon 
Israel, — the  second  was  that,  in  consequence  of 
wliich,  God  heard  not  the  prayers  addressed  to 
Him  amidst  the  calamity  of  war.  In  favor  of 
this  view  is  the  twofold  nature  of  the  veils  or 
coverings  indicated.  The  first  time  it  is  the  wrath 
with  wliich  the  Lord  envelops  Himself.  Out 
of  this  veil  of  wrath  shoot  forth  the  lightnings, 
as  out  of  a  thunder-cloud,  which  kindle  the  fire 
of  war  in  Israel.  The  second  time  tiie  veil  or 
covering  is  only  a  gloomy,  dense  cloud,  which, 
like  a  bulwark,  prevents  prayer  from  passing 
through.  Whether  the  Poet  here  thought  of  the 
hi.slorical  pillar  of  cloud  (Ps.  xcix.  7),  or  of  an 
ideal  one  (Ps.  xcvii.  2),  must  remain  undecided. 
See,  besides  ver.  8;  Ps.  Iv.  2,  and  especially  Sir. 
xxxii.  16,  17. 

v'er.  45.  Thou  hast  made  us  as  the  off- 
scouring  and  refuse  in  the  midst  of  the 
people.  —  77/ow  didst  make  us  offscourings  and  re- 
fuse in  the  midst  of  the  nations.     Since  the  Lord 


permitted  no  prayer  to  pass  through  to  Him,  the 
work  of  destruction,  spoken  of  in  ver.  4.3,  made 
unimpeded  progress  ;  the  consequence  of  which 
was,  that  Israel,  ground  down  to  the  dust,  is  now 
an  object  of  coiifetnpt  among  heathen  nations. 
[Offscouring,  sweepings,  what  is  swept  away. — Re- 
fuse, what  is  rejected  as  worthless,  what  is  thrown 
away. — Calvin:  "Paul  says,  that  he  and  his 
associates  were  the  ofiFscouring  [Tvepiipf^/jara)  of 
the  world,  1  Cor.  iv.  13.  He  means  that  they 
were  despised  as  offscourings  or  scrapings.  *  * 
What  the  Prophet  had  in  view  is  not  obscure ; 
for  he  means  that  the  degradation  of  the  people 
was  not  hidden,  but  open  to  all  nations,  as  though 
God  had  erected  a  theatre  in  Judea,  and  there 
exhibited  a  remarkable  and  an  unusual  example 
of  His  vengeance," — among  the  nations.  Words- 
worth: "  The  nations,  among  which  we  Israelites 
are  scattered.  Such  the  Jewish  nation  has  been 
for  1800  years;  and  such  it  will  remain  till  it 
turn  to  God  in  Christ."— W.  H.  H.J  See  Is. 
xxiv.  13. 

Ver.  46.  Here  again,  in  the  order  of  the  initial 
letters,  0  is  followed  by  £3,  and  not  ^.  That  this 
was  the  original  order  of  the  verses  and  not  the 
result  of  later  changes,  the  context  undeniably 
proves.  It  is,  therefore,  certainly  incomprehen- 
sible how  any  one  could  have  thought  of  placing 
the  triad  of  vers.  46-48,  after  that  of  vers.  49-51 
(Meier)  [Boothroyd,  likewise]. — All  our  ene- 
mies have  opened  their  mouths  against 
us, — gaped  at  us  with  their  mouth.  This  verse, 
which  contains  only  a  more  particular  definition 
of  what  is  meant  by  D1N0  \refuse,  or  as  Dr.  Nae- 
GELSBACH  translates  it  Schande,  shame,  disgrace^ 
in  ver.  45,  has  already  occurred  almost  word  for 
word,  in  ii.  16,  which  see. 

Ver.  47.  Fear  and  a  snare — terror  and  the 
pit.  A  quotation  from  Jer.  xlviii.  43  ;  Is.  xxiv. 
17.  [Calvin,  Brougiiton,  Blayney,  Noyes, 
Naegelsbach  and  Gerlach,  all  translate  the 
second  word  pit,  as  it  is  rendered  in  Jeremiah 
and  Isaiah,  in  the  places  cited  above.  In  the 
latter  place.  Dr.  J.  A.  Alexander  says,  "It  is  a 
probable,  though  not  a  necessary  supposition, 
that  the  terms  here  used  are  borrowed  from  the 
ancient  art  of  hunting.  HHiD  [/ear]  would  then 
denote  some  device  by  vchich  wild  beasts  were 
frightened  into  snares  and  pitfalls.  It  is  at  least 
a  remarkable  coincidence  that  the  Romans  gave 
the  name  formido  to  an  apparatus  used  for  this 
purpose."  We  may,  however,  take  fear  in  its 
usual  sense,  without  destroying  the  allusion  to 
hunted  wild  beasts,  suggested  in  this  passsage 
by  pit,  and  in  Jeremiah  and  Isaiah  by  j^it  and 
snare.  He  who  flies  for  terror  falls  into  the  pit. 
So  Jarchi,  quoted  by  Gerlach.  Calvin:  "He 
compares  here  the  anxieties  into  which  the  peo- 
ple had  been  brought,  to  &  pitfall  and  dread.  *  * 
The  meaning  is,  tliat  the  people  had  been  reduced 
to  such  straits,  that  there  was  no  outlet  for  them; 
*  *  filled  with  dread,  they  sought  refuge,  but 
saw  pitfalls  on  every  side." — W.  H.  H.]  Is  come 
upon  us, — fell  to  our  lot  [happened  to  zis,  or  came 
upon  us],  desolation  and  destruction — shame 
and  hurt.  [Tiie  E.  V.  is  better,  and  is  adopted 
by  most  versions.  See  Gram,  note  above. — W. 
H.  H.]  In  these  pithy  and  forcible  words  th« 
Poet  sums  up  all  that  Israel  had  suffered. 


^ 


CHAP.  III.  48-51. 


iiiy 


III.  48-61. 

48  Mine  eye  runneth  down  with  rivers  of  water  for  the  destruction  of  the  daughter 

49  of  my  people.  Mine  eye  triekleth  down,  and  ceaseth  not,  without  any  intermission. 
50,  51  Till  the  Lord  look  down,  and  behold  from  heaven.     Mine  eye  affecteth  mine 

heart,  because  of  all  the  daughters  of  my  city. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  48. — The  first  clause  is  found  in  Ps.  cxix.  136,  almost  word  for  word.    For  construction,  see  my  Gr.,  §  69,  2  a. 

[AttoT  yeihs  of  plenty  a,nA  want,  the  accusative  denotes  the  more  remote  object  (Naeg.  Gr.)]. — J7£3  Jeremiah  never  uses. 

[Observe  it  is  here  the  initial  word,  where  special  choice  and  even  preference  for  novelty  of  expression  would  be  expected. — 
W.  H.  II.] 

Ver.  49. — The  verb  "1JJ,  of  which  Jeremiah  uses  the  Hiphil,  once  only  [Jeremiah  seems  to  have  been  predisposed  to  use 

words  (m'y  rmce, — so  new  words  in  Lamentations  need  not  surprise  us,  Jeremiah  being  the  author. — W.  H.  H.],  xviii.  21,  oc- 
curs only  in  Niph.,  Hipli.  and  lloph.  Such  places  a.s  2  Sam.  xiv.  14;  Job  xx.  28;  Ps.  Ixxvii.  3,  give  it  the  sense  of  over- 
flowing, a.3  weW  as  of  being  poured  out. — nOTn  X'71  reminds  us  of  ^J''0^P~7X^,  Jer.  xiv.  17. — Jlijlin    TXO   seems  to 

be  only  another  form  of  the  same  thought  in  Ps.  Ixxvii.  3,  where  we  read  the  words  J13j"\   X'^l   iTlJJ   ''T-     J1i3    i» 

T  :       T :  •      •  T 

debikm,  languidum  esse,  viribus  defici  (Gen.  xlv.  26;  Hab.  i.  4).    Both  HJIS,  "•  18,  aud  HJ^Sn,  signify  remissio,  relaxatio. 

T  T     ~: 

Both  are  an.  Key.     See  ii.  18  and  remarks  there. 

Vei\  50. — "Ipty  (comp.  (TKin-reaOai.,   spectare)  ia  prospicere,  despicere.    It  occurs  only  in  Hiph.  and  Niph. ;  is  not  found 

in  Jeremiah;  set'  Deut.  xxvi.  15  ;  Ps.  xiv.  2  ;  liii.  3;  cii.  20,  in  all  of  which  places  the  word  ia  used  with  the  addition  of 

D'Otyp  or  D'nsp. 

Ver.  51. — If  we  compare  the  Hithp.  77yr\n,  which   in  such  places  as  Num.  xxii.  29;  Judg.  xix.  25;  1  Sam.  xxxi.  4; 

Jer.  xxxviii.  19,  has  the  sense  of  satisfying  one's  desire  by  violence;   if,  further,  we  compare  the  substantives  n7''7j^, 

n'7' /y,  and  ^^VO,  which  denote,  not  merely  generally /ociraiw,  a  deed,  but  also  especially  a  bad  deed  (see  Deut.  xxii.  14, 

17  ;  P."!.  cxli.  4 ;  Kz.  xx.  43  ;  Jer.  xiv.  18  ;  xi.  IS,  etc.) ; — there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  idea  of  doing  a  harm  inheres  in  the 
Poel  also.  Iiii.  IJ, '22;  ii.  20,  where  also  this  word  occurs,  this  idea  is  made  e.xpressly  apparent  by  other  words  of  this 
sense,     iiut  we  are  authorized  by  the  above  citations,  to  take  the  word  in  this  sense,  without  such  express  indication  of  its 

meaning  in  the  context.  [Gerlach  :  /  7I  y  with  7,  to  do  some  one  an  injury,  occurs  in  i.  12,  22 ;  ii.  20 ;  therefore  there  is 
nothing  unusual  in  the  7  here,  as  Ewald  says.] — Bottcher  would  read  '"T^*  11133  'liJOi  of  "'U  '^^  weeping  of  my  city. 
But  even  if  Piel  is  authorized  by  Jer.  xxxi.  15 ;  Ez.  viii.  14, — and  73  with  the  Inf.,  by  Deut.  iv.  7,  yet  'r\i33  would  be  ex- 
pected [and  then  would  be  ungrammatical,  as  Gerlach  shows].  But  no  change  in  the  reading  is  necessary. — JO  is  causal, 
as  Deut.  vii.  7,  8 ;  Joel  iv.  19 ;  Is.  liii.  5 ;  Prov.  xx.  4,  eic— 'TJ?,  Is.  xiv.  13 ;  2  Sam.  xix.  38. 


EXEGETICAL   AND    CRITICAL. 

Vers.  48-51.  These  four  verses  treat  of  the  eye 
of  the  speaker,  as  the  organ  by  means  of  which 
he  manifests  his  pain  : — for  ver.  50  contains  only 
a  thought  subordinated  to  that  of  ver.  49.  The 
new  succession  of  thoughts  begins  with  the  last 
member  of  a  triad  (the  3  triad).  Nothing  like 
this  has  occuri-ed  before  in  this  Song  [where  the 
triplets  have  been  remarkable  for  their  unifica- 
tion]. Would  the  Poet  thus  intimate  that  he  has 
passed  the  culmination-point  of  his  Poem,  and 
therefore  the  culmination-point  of  its  artistic 
structure  also  ?  It  is  not  easy  to  decide.  Be- 
sides, the  fact  that  these  verses  are  of  the 
character  of  one  sustained  and  continuous  transi- 
tion period,  is  itself  an  indication  of  artistic  exe- 
cution. For  while  in  these  verses  the  Poet  him- 
self is  the  speaker,  yet  he  speaks  of  his  own  pain 
with  reference  to  the  public  calamity  [thus  con- 
necting what  is  here  said  with  what  precedes], 
whilst  from  ver.  52  he  not  only  himself  speaks, 
but  he  speaks  of  himself  [so  that  these  verses 
form  a  connecting  link  with  what  follows,  and 
the  subject  gracefully  passes  from  the  public 
calaiuitics  to  the  private  griefs  of  the  speaker. — 
W.  11.11.]. 

A'er.  48.   Mine    eye  runneth  down  w^ith 


rivers  of  ■water. — See  Ps.  cxix.  136.  We  find 
the  same  sentiment  in  Jer.  viii.  '1\  [E.  V.,  ix.  1], 
ix.  17  [E.  v.,  ix.  18],  xiii.  17;  xiv.  17;  Lam.  i. 
16. — For  the  destruction  of  the  daughter 
of  my  people. — See   ii.  11. 

Ver  4y.  Mine  eye  triekleth  down,  and 
ceaseth  not,  w^ithout  any  intermission.— 
Mine  eye  overflows  unceasingly ,  without  intermission. 
[Lit.,  My  eye  is  poured  out,  or  overfloivs,  and  ceaseth 
not,  so  as  not  to  be  [from  not  being)  intermission. 
In  correct  English,  My  eye  ooerflowelh,  unceasingly 
without  intermission.  Gerlach:  "  intermi,'isio>is, 
not  of  miseries  (Michaehs,  Rosenmueller,  see 
Vulg.),  but  so  that  there  is  no  cessation,  without 
discontinuance.  See  Lexicons  and  Ewald,  §  323, 
a."_W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  50.  Till— or  until— the  LORD— TeAo- 
vrtA— look  dow^n  and  behold  from  Heaven. 
—  As  already  remarked,  this  is  a  thought  sub- 
ordinate to  that  of  ver.  49,  which  it  limits,  or 
qualifies.  The  Poet's  tears  shall  flow  without 
ceasing,  not  absolutely  for  ever,  but  until  the 
Lord,  by  graciously  regarding  them,  shall  cause 
them  to  cease.  [When  God  looks  down  and  be- 
holds. He  begins  to  hear  prayer  and  alFord  saving 
grace.  See  Ps.  cii.  19,  20.  Henderson  trans- 
lates, While  Jehovah  looketh  down  and  beholdeih 
from  Heaven,  and  remarks,  "The  Prophet  re- 
garded it  as  a  great  aggravation  of  the  calamity, 


130 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


that  the  Lord  should  see  it  all,  and  yet  not  in-  I 
terpose  for  its  removal."     But  this  is  to  take  the 
Hebrew  preposition  1^,  in  an  unusual  sense,  and 
is  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  constant   tenor  | 
of  Bible    language,    which    represents    God   as 
averting  His  face  from   those  who  otfend   Him, 
and  as  looking  only  on  those  who  are  objects  of  I 
His  favor.     Besides,  here  God  has  wrapped  Him-  | 
self  in  His  wrath,  ver.  43,  and  in  dark  impene- 1 
trable  clouds,  ver.  44,  that  He  may  not  be  moved  ' 
to  compassion  either  by  the  sight  or  the  cries  of  I 
the  sufferers.— W.  H.  H.]  | 

Ver.  61.   The  description  passes,  as    it   were, 
from    without   to   within.     In  vers.   48,  49,  the 
weeping  of  the  Poet  had  been  described  with  re- 
gard to  its  extent  [its  unintermitted  continuance], 
but  here  the  intensity  of  that  weeping  is  made  ap-  i 
parent    froui    its    internal    effect  on    his   soul. —  | 
Mine  eye  affecteth  mine  heart  (marg.,  m3/| 
soul)— Mine  eye  paineth  my  soul  [or  gives  it  pain, 
thut  meiner  Seele  weh,  makes  my  soul  ache.]   The  I 
eye  hurts  the  soul,  when  it  increases  the  pain  of  | 
the  soul,  by  adding  thereto  a  physical  pain.     It  | 
is  true  that  weeping  is  generally  a  relief  to  the 
sorrowful.     But  when  weeping  weakens  the  eye 
so  that  it  smarts,  then   the  soul,  as  I  said,  feels 
that  as  an  aggravation  of  its  own  pain.     See  Ps. 
vi.  7.      [Calvin:    "  Mine  eye  grieves  my  soul.      Ho 
had  said,  that  his  eye  flowed   down,  and  then, 
that   it   was  like  a  fountain,  from  which  many 
streams  or  rivers  flowed:   he  now  adopts  another 
mode  of  speaking,  that  his  eye  troubled  or  grieved 
his  souV     Broughton:   Mine  eye  worketh  into  my 
ioul.      Blayney:    Mine  eye  worketh  trouble  to  my 
soul.     NoYEs  and  Gerlach  take  my  soul  as  if  it. 
were    simply  a  personal    pronoun.      Mine  eye  i: 
painful  to  me  (Noyes),  or  pains  me  (Gerlach). 

But  to  my  sotd,  ''tJ'337,  as  the  expressed  object 
of  the  verb,  is  indubitably  emphatic.  So  Words- 
worth :  "  Mine  eye  vexeth  my  soul  {nephesh),  the 
seat  of  passion  (see  ver.  20)  by  the  misery  which 
it  sees,  and  for  which  it  weeps."  See  Gram, 
notes  above. — W.  H.  H.] — Because  of  all  the 
daughters  of  my  city.     It  is  not  necessary  to 


change  the  Hebrew  here,  as  Bottcher  proposes 
(see  Gram,  notes  above),  for  i.  4,  18  ;  ii.  10,  21, 
show  that  the  Poet  regarded  the  sad  fate  of  the 
tender  virgins  as  one  of  the  culmination  points 
of  the  general  calamity.  For  the  same  reason,  I 
do  not  think  that  by  the  daughters  of  my  city  are 
intended  daughter  cities.  [Tochterstiidte,  i.  e., 
cities  dependent  on  Jerusalem.  So  Ewald. 
Blayney  too  :  "  Probsibly  the  lesser  cities  and 
towns  dependent  on  the  metropolis  are  hereby  in- 
tended, see  Jer.  xlix.  2."]  The  Poet  nowhere 
else  refers  to  such  cities.  Besides,  it  should  be 
observed,  that  daughters  of  my  city  is  in  parallel- 
ism with  daughter  of  my  people,  ver.  48.  This 
gives  a  beautiful  symmetry  to  the  whole  para- 
graph; the  first  and  last  verses,  vers.  48,  51, 
each  closes  with  a  statement  of  a  reason  for  his 
weeping,  while  the  intervening  verses  describe 
the  extent  arid  character  of  his  weeping.  [The 
English  version  indicates  in  the  margin  a  possi- 
ble translation,  which  Calvin  alone  has  had  the 
audacity  to  adopt :  Mine  eye  affecteth  mine  heart 
more  than  all  the  daughters  of  my  city.  This  would 
seem  to  mean,  that  his  heart  was  more  affected 
by  his  own  grief,  than  by  that  of  all  the  daugh- 
ters of  Jerusalem ;  or,  that  his  grief  affected  his 
own  heart,  more  than  it  did  the  daughters  of  his 
city.  But  Calvin  explains  it  as  meaning,  that 
he  wept  more  than  all  the  girls  in  Jerusalem ! 
"As  the  female  sex,  as  it  is  well  known,  are  more 
tender  and  softer  than  men,  the  Prophet  ampli- 
fies his  lamentation  by  this  comparison,  that  in 
weeping  he  exceeded  all  the  young  women  of  the 
city,  so  that  he  had  almost  forgotten  his  man- 
hood." Kalkar  takes  the  daughters  of  the  city  in 
the  impossible  sense  of  mcolm  urbis  (an  ingenious 
adoption  of  a  feminine  form  used  for  common 
gender),  and  translates  /  was  more  vehemently  af- 
fected than  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  city.  The 
simple  and  natural  translation  of  the  words  gives 
such  good  sense  and  is  so  in  harmony  with  the 
sentiments  of  the  whole  poem,  as  shown  above, 
that  it  is  astonishing  what  wasteful  invention  has 
been  used  to  find  out  some  other  sense. — W. 
H.  H.] 


III.  62-54. 

52,  53       Mine  enemies  chased  me  sore,  like  a  bird,  without  cause.     They  have  cut  off 
54  my  life  in  the  dungeon,  and  cast  a  stone  upon  me.     Waters  flowed  over  mine  head ; 
then  I  said,  I  am  cut  off. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  52. — The  verb  Hi) 2f  Jeremiah  uses  once,  xvi.  16. — lf£)y  Jeremiah  never  uses.  [Jeremiah  often  uses  HIV  in  the 
collective  s&ns&  for  fowl  or  birds.  In  one  single  verse,  xii.  9,  he  twice  uses  £0'"_J^,  meaning  birds  of  prey,  ravenous  birds. 
This  passage  in  Lamentations  is  the  only  place  where  he  has  occasion  to  speak  of  a  single  bird  pursued  by  the  hunter.  If  he 
had  ever  used  another  word  in  the  same  sense,  T13^  would  have  been  chosen  for  this  place  for  the  sake  of  the  alliteration, 
*113X3  '  jnX  nV,  and  also  as  suggesting  the  twittering  of  the  helpless  victim.— W.  H.  H.]— The  expression  Diin  ^^'i^ 
octiirs  only  here.    In  Ps.  xxxv.  19;  Ixix.  f),  UIV\  'N]!i'  occurs,  both  times  in  parallelism  with  ^pK?  'D'S?-    Tliis  shows 

that  Din  belongs,  as  an  adverbial  qualification,  to  O' >?,  not  to  '  jnV- 
T  •  - :  •      T 

Vci .  5:5. — r\"3V  occurs  in  Kal  only  here,     Niph.  is  without  doubt  extingui  (Job  xxiii.  17),  exarescere  (of  water,  Job  vi. 
-  T 
17) ;  Piol  is  perdere,  to  destroy  (Ps.  Ixxxviii.  17  ;  cxix,  139)  ;  Iliph.  has  the  same  sense  (Ps,  xviii.  41 ;  liv.  7  ;  Ixix.  5,  etc.). 

nOX  might  indeed  have  an  intransitive  sense,  to  be  sunk  in  silence,  in  speeclilessn^s,  that  is  to  say,  to  be  destroyed,  to  per 


CHAP.  III.  52-54. 


131 


iih,  in  favor  of  which  sense  are  the  kindred  roots  QV^,  DO'!.  HOTi  and  the  Dialects.    [So  HEia>£RSON :  ITiet/  Tiave  maii 

—  T  T  T 

my  life  sihnt  in  the  dungerm.]    But  since  in  all  the  parallel  members  of  the  paragraph,  vers.  52-54,  the  enemies  are  the  sub- 
ject,  it   is  necessary  to  regard  them  as  the  subject    of  IHOlf  also,  and  to  take  this  word  in  a  transitive  sense.     If  nOV 

:  T  -T 

signifies  destroy,  1133  can  signify  in  the.  pit,  or  into  the  pit.    In  the  latter  case  it  would  be  constr.  prxgnans.    This  would  b« 

more  correct,  because  it  better  answers  to  the  fact.     For  the  enemies  did  not  succeed  in  destroying  the  life  of  the  prophet 
in  the  pit,  but  casting  it  down  into  the  pit  for  the  purpose  of  destruction.—  ITT.  with  reference  to  the  form,  see  HJ'T,  ver 

33  [Green's  Gr.,  ?  150,  2.] 

Ver.  5-i. — n-iy  is  manare,  Jluere.    Kal  occurs  only  here.    Elsewhere  the  Hiphil  at  two  places,  Deut.  xi.  i;  2  Kings  vi. 

6.    [The  use  of  Kal  may  indicate  that  the  word  here  denotes,  not  as  in  Hipliil,  dashing  over,  overwhelming,  but,  like  n?I 

and  31f,  to  7nelt,  dissolve,  flow,  trickle  down.    This  sense  is  favored  by  the  preposition  71?,  to,  on,  not  over. — W.  H.  H.]— 

'HTOX,  see   TD5<1,  ver.  IS. — 'pITJlJ.     1TJ  is  dissecare,  discindere.    Jeremiah  never  uses  it.    Niph.,  besides  here,  in  la. 

•   :  -  T  -     T  •  :  |T  :  •         -t 

liii.  8  ;  I's.  Ixxxviii.  6;  Ez.  x.\xvii.  11,  etc. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  52-54.  The  speaker  here  returns  to  the 
description  of  his  own  personal  sufferings.  The 
central  point  of  these  sufferings  is  the  pit,  into 
which  the  Prophet  has  been  thrown,  and  that  by 
enemies  who  were  personally  hostile  to  him  with- 
out cause  (ver.  52).  and  who  pursued  him  inces- 
santly (ver.  52)  with  vindictiveness  and  mociiery 
(vers.  60-63).  Ought  we  to  interpret  all  that  is 
said  of  the  pit  as  merely  figurative?  So  far  as 
what  is  said  of  the  pit  alone,  this  could  be  done. 
But  what  the  Poet  says  of  his  enemies,  cannot 
possibly  be  a  mere  figure  of  speech.  When  he 
mourns  that  though  he  had  given  them  no  cause 
for  hatred,  tliey  had,  nevertheless,  incessantly 
insulted  him  and  pursued  him  with  measureless 
vengeance, — this  surely  is  no  figurative  way  of 
speaking.  We  have  already  shown  that  the  sub- 
ject who  speaks  in  this  song  (except  in  those 
parts  in  which  the  Poet  speaks  in  the  first  person 
plural)  cannot  be  the  people.  The  enemies, 
further,  cannot  be  the  Chaldeans,  because  they 
are  called  those  that  are.  viy  enemies  icithoiit  cau.-!e, 
and  because  the  Poet  speaks  of  his  being  already 
delivered  from  their  power  and  now  only  invokes 
[not  deliverance  from  them  but]  the  vengeance 
of  God  upon  them  (vers.  55-66).  On  the  other 
hand,  Jeremiah  speaks  of  his  enemies,  xx.  7-12, 
exactly  as  is  done  here.  He  describes  their  in- 
sulting mockery  [For  1  heard  the  defaming  of  many) 
and  their  vindictiveness  (rve  shall,  take  our  revenge 
on  him,  Til'3'p  ■Ijr\"OpJ  nnpj,  ver.  10,  comp.  Lam. 
iii.  60),  and  hopes  that  God  will  avenge  him  upon 
them  [let  me  see  thy  vengeance  on  them,  ver.  12). 
Since  the  description  of  his  enemies  in  this  place 
exactly  corresponds  with  that  which  Jeremiah 
gives  of  his  enemies,  all  of  which  is  confirmed 
by  so  many  facts  related  in  his  prophetical  book 
(xi.  18-20;  xii.  1-6;  ixvi.  8;  xxxvii.  11-15; 
xxxviii.  4-6),  can  we  doubt  that  what  is  said  of 
the  pit  should  be  taken  literally,  especially  if  we 
consider  the  fact  that  what  is  here  said  agrees 
substantially  with  what  Jeremiah  says,  chap, 
xxxviii.,  of  the  pit  into  which  he  was  actually 
thrown  by  his  enemies?  We  are  sure,  therefore, 
that  the  Poet  here  had  in  his  eye  the  persecutions 
which  Jeremiah  suffered  from  his  enemies.  He 
personates  Jeremiah.  The  chief  subject  of  the 
third  song  is  Jeremiah. 

Ver.  52.  Mine  enemies  chased  me  sore, 
like  a  bird,  without  cause. — Jlunt^d,  hunted 
have  they  me  like  a  bird,  all  inine  enemies  without 
cause.  Like  a  bird:  see  Ps.  xi.  1.  where  the  soul 
of  the  persecuted  innocent  is  likewise  compared 


to  a  bird.  \_They  that  were  without  cause  mint 
enemies  hunted  me  down  like  a  bird.  So  Blatnet 
and  Notes  render  the  verb  l^V,  which  seems  to 
mean,  not  to  hunt,  in  the  abstract  sense,  but  to 
obtain  by  hunting,  to  seize,  to  lay  hold  of,  and  ai 
used  here  in  an  intensive  sense,  would  imply 
persevering  and  successful  liunting.  Dou.\y  : 
My  enemies  have  chased  me  and  caught  me  like  a 
bird.  Hunted  me  down  like  a  bird  expresses  the 
idea  suggested  by  the  comparison. — As  even  a 
bird  is  at  last  tired  out  and  hunted  down  by  a  per- 
severing pursuer.  The  point  of  the  comparison 
is  the  perseverance  of  the  successful  hunter  in 
pursuit  of  a  bird :  as  David  says  of  Saul's  tire- 
less and  remorseless  pursuit  of  him,  "  The  King 
of  Israel  is  come  out  to  seek  a  flea,  as  when  one 
doth  hunt  a  partridge  in  the  mountains"  (1  Sam. 
xxvi.  20).  This  idea  is  expressed  in  the  Paris 
ed.,  1805,  of  the  French,  Ceux  qui  sont  mes 
ennemis  sans  cause  m'ont  poursuivi  a  outrance, 
comme  on  poursuit  un  oiseau.  The  French  of 
Martin  gives  the  same  sense.  The  commenta- 
tors generally  fail  to  er.plain  the  comparison. 
Calvin,  who  supposes  tl  e  lack  of  "  both  pru- 
dence and  courage"  in  birds  is  referred  to,  is 
evidently  wrong,  both  as  to  the  fact  that  birds 
are  thus  deficient,  and  as  to  its  application  here. 
Both  Gesenius  and  Fuerst  explain  the  verb, 
^^V,  as  used  here,  in  the  sense  of  laying  snares  as 
for  a  bird.  This  gives  a  good  sense,  and  carries 
out  the  comparison  ;  but  it  is  adopted  by  none 
of  the  versions,  and  seems  inconsistent  with  the 
general  use  of  the  verb  and  the  intensive  mean- 
ing suggesteil  by  the  duplication. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  53.  They  have  cut  off  my  life  in  the 
dungeon. — They  destroyed  in  the  pit  my  life  [i.  e., 
sought  to  destroy  it.  See  Gram,  notes  above. 
From  Jer.  xxxviii.  4,  it  is  certain  that  their  ob- 
ject in  throwing  him  into  the  pit  was  to  kill 
him. — W.  H.  H.] — And  cast  a  stone  upon 
me, — and  threw  stones  upon  me.  But  should  we 
translate  they  threw  stones  upon  me,  or  they  cast  a 
stone  over  me  \i.  e.,  over  the  mouth  of  the  pit]  ? 
Jer.  xxxviii.  says  notliing  of  either  the  one  or 
the  other.  Yet  it  is  possible  that  Jeremiah, 
whose  statements  in  that  chapter  were  confined, 
with  admirable  reserve,  to  the  principal  circum- 
stances, might  have  omitted  this  point.  And  it 
is  also  possible  that  the  author  of  our  song,  in 
case  he  were  not  Jeremiah  himself,  may  have 
added  this  particular,  eiiher  from  hearsay,  or 
out  of  his  own  invention.  [The  addition  of  a 
new  fact  affords  a  strong  presumption  that  Jere- 
miah wrote  this  book.  One  personating  him 
would  have  adhered  to  facts  well  authenticated 
in  his  history. — W.  H.  H.]     Grammatically  con- 


132 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


•idered  there  is  nothing  in  either  the  verb  or  the 
noun  decisive  in  favor  of  the  one  or  the  other 
explanation  The  verb  m\  which  is  used  in 
Joel  iv.  3,  Ob.  11 ;  Nah.  iii.  10  of  casting  the  lot, 
and  in  Jer.  i.  14  of  shooting  an  arrow,  Zecha- 
liah  uses  ^Iso  of  throwing  down  iron  [?]  horns 
(ii.  4;  E.  V.  i.  21).  The  word  only  occurs  in 
the  places  cited.  But  if  Zechariah  uses  the 
word  of  throwing  down  objects  of  such  size  and 
weight,  then  it  could  properly  be  used  also  of 
throwing  a  heavy  stone  over  the  opening  of  the 
pit.  The  noun,  |3X,  further,  can  as  well  signify 
collectively  a  7iumber  of  stones  as  one  stone,  for  it 
frequently  has  that  meaning  after  DjT,  Lev  xx. 
2,  27;  xxiv  23:  Josh,  vii  25;  1  Kings  xii  18 
{\2V.  U  ^OJTI),  comp.  Num  xiv.  10,  xv.  35; 
Deut.  xxi.  21.  But  the  preposition,  '3,  upon  me, 
favors  the  explanation  they  cast  stoups  on  me.  For 
the  diflFerence  between  3  and  vX  or  7^  is,  that 
the  former,  as  Fuerst  says,  denotes  "  decided 
vicinity,"  or  "  such  motion  as  is  connected  with 
the  attainment  of  its  object,"  whilst  by  the  latter 
is  expressed  "motion  toward  without  nearness." 
They  threw  a  stone  on  me,  that  is  to  say,  over  me 
on  the  mouth  of  the  pit,  would  be  expressed  by 

7^.  [Though  there  is  a  foundation  for  this  dis- 
tinction between  these  two  prepositions,  yet  they 
are  often  used  indiscriminately,  without  affect- 
ing the  sense,  as  for  instance  with  the  verbs 
p3'l,  }}!)■   ty^l-    3,  too,  is  used  in  the  general 

sense  of  over,  as  with  71^0,  in  the  sense  of  rulins: 

-    T  " 

over,  or  having  the  management  of  aifairs,  see 
Ps.  ciii.  19;  Gen.  xxiv.  2;  xlv.  8,  26;  Deut.  xv. 
6;  Judges  viii.  22;  Josh.  xii.  5;  1  Kings  v.  1. 
If  the  use  of  3  here  in  the  sense  indicated  by 
E.  V.  is  not  absolutely  forbidden,  it  is  certainly 
to  be  preferred.  1.  It  would  have  been  a  wanton 
outrage  to  throw  stones  upon  the  Prophet  after 
he  was  cast  into  the  pit.  2.  It  seems  incredible 
that  Jeremiah  should  not  in  his  narrative  of  the 
affair  have  mentioned  such  a  remarkable  inci- 
dent, if  it  had  occurred.  3.  They  could  only 
have  thrown  the  stones  for  the  purpose  of  killing 
him,  and  how  then  had  he  escaped  death  ?  4.  The 
fact  that  the  pit  was  covered  over  with  a  stone, 
to  prevent  his  possible  escape,  was  a  most  likely 
occurrence,  and  yet  one  that,  because  likely  and 
even  to  be  presumed,  might  have  been  passed 


over  without  special  mention.  Finally,  all  the 
versions,  except  Naegelsbach's  and  Gerlaoh's, 
render  it  as  in  E.  V.  ;  Gataker  indicates  both 
senses  without  deciding  in  favor  of  either. — • 
W   H.  H.] 

Ver.  54.  Waters  flovred  over  my  head. — 
Waters  dashed  [surged)  over  my  head.  This  cannot 
be  meant  of  the  flowing  together  of  the  water  in 
a  physical  sense,  over  his  head.  For  in  Jer. 
xxxviii.  6,  it  is  expressly  said  that  thei-e  was  no 
water  in  the  pit,  only  mud.  Besides,  the  flowing 
together  of  water  over  his  head  must  iaovitably 
liave  had  for  its  speedy  consequence  the  death  of 
iiim  who  was  thrown  into  the  pit.  Either  the 
words  mean  merely,  water  ran  on  my  head;  or, 
what  is  more  likely,  this  way  of  speaking  should 
be  understood  as  metaphorical,  as  also  in  Ps. 
Ixix.  3  (2),  15  (14),  16  (15),  he  who  is  sunk  in 
the  mire,  speaks  at  the  same  time  of  being 
drowned  by  the  water-flood.  That  he  intends 
this  as  an  image  descriptive  of  the  greatest  peril 
of  death  (see  Ps.  xviii.  17  (16);  xxxii.  6;  xlii. 

(7);  Ixxxviii.  17  (16),  18  (17) ;  cxxx.  1 ;  cxliv. 
7),  is  evident  also  from  Ps.  Ixix.  2(1),  where/or 
the  waters  are  come  in  even  to  my  soul  can  only  be 
taken  in  a  figurative  sense.  [In  Ps.  Ixix.  all  is 
figurative.  But  here,  where  all  the  rest  is 
literal,  to  take  one  term  alone  as  figurative,  is 
unnatural.  It  would  be  better,  with  Hender- 
son, to  take  the  whole  description  as  figurative, 
and  as  having  no  direct  allusion  to  the  account 
given  in  Jer.  xxxviii.  6-12.  But  this  is  not 
necessary.  The  words  may  only  mean  Water  ran 
on  my  head.  See  Gram,  notes  above.  If  there  was 
mud  in  the  bottom  of  the  pit,  there  was  a  supply 
of  water  in  some  quantities  from  some  source. 
The  mere  condensation  of  the  vapor  in  the 
atmosphere  against  the  sides  of  the  pit,  would 
produce  some,  and  there  may  have  been  from 
small  springs  supply  enough  to  trickle  down  and 
splash  upon  his  head.  The  language,  if  suggested 
by  any  Psalm,  was  more  likely  that  of  xl.  3  (2), 
tlian  of  the  Ixix. — and  brought  me  up  from  a  pit 
of  noise,  and  from  the  miry  clay, — where  the  noise 
referred  to  seems  to  be  that  of  running  water; 
The  Prophet,  sinking  in  the  mud  beneath,  and 
reminded  by  the  water  falling  on  his  head  that 
he  was  in  danger  of  drowning,  might  well  ex- 
claim /  a7n  lost,  I  am  already  as  good  as  gone  ! — 
W.  H.  H.]— Then  I  said,  I  am  cut  off,—/ 
said,  I  am  cut  off.  Notes:  1  ajti  undone.  Geb- 
LACH  :  I  am  lost.    Comp.  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  5.] 


III.  65-66. 


I  called  upon  thy  name,  O  Lord,  out  of  the  low  dungeon.     Thou  hast  heard 
0  i  my  voice ;   hide  not  thine  ear  at  my  breathing,  at  my  cry.     Thou  drewest  near 

58  in  the  day  that  I  called  upon  thee  :   thou  saidst.  Fear  not.     O  Lord,   thou  hast 

59  pleaded  the  causes  of  my  soul ;  thou  hast  redeemed  my  life.     O  Lord,  thou  lu^st 

60  seen  my  wrong;  judge  thou  my  cause.     Thou  hast  seen  all  their  vengeance,  and 

61  all  their  imaginations  against  me.  Thou  hast  heard  their  reproach,  O  Lord, 
and  all  their  imaginations  against  me.  The  lips  of  those  that  rose  up  ag-ainst 
me,  and  their  device  against   me  all  the  day.      Behold  their  sitting  down,  and 


55,  56 

K7 


62 
63 


64  their  rising  up  ;  I  am  their  music.     Render  unto  them  a  recompence,  0  Lord, 


CHAP.  III.  55-06.  isj 


65  according  to  the  work  of  their   hands.      Give  them  sorrow  of  heart,  thy  curse 

66  unto  them.     Persecute  and  destroy  them  in  anger  from  under  the  heavens  of  the 
Lord. 

textual  and  grammatical. 

Ver.  55.— '>"  DB'  K*1p-    This  expression  does  not  occur  in  Jer. ;  he  nses  only  once  0'   DE^3  S^P.  x.  25.    [There  ii 
tIt  ••  :        tIt 

not  enough  difference  in  the  two  expressions  to  afford  the  shadow  of  an  argument  for  or  against  tVi-  a'lthorship  of  Lamen- 
tations, even  if  tlie  latter  expression  had  been  frequent  with  Jeremiah ;  but  as  in  fict  it  only  otcurs  ouce,  who  can  say 
which  of  the  two  expressions  was  characteristic  of  his  style? — W.  H.  H.] — nmnfl  lUO-  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  <P\  1133. 
Elsewher '  occir  only  the  expressions  fjT  h'li,  Jos.  xv.  19,  and  ''y\  V^H,  Ez.  xxvi.  20;  xxxii.  18,  24  [in  each  case  in 
close  connection  with  '^')2- — W.  H.  H.],  or  VIX  '■H,  Is.  xliv.  23 ;  Ps.  Ixiii.  10;  cxxxix.15.  mTinn  is  to  be  regarded  ai 
related  to  113  in  the  genitive,  not  in  the  accusative  sense. 

Ver.  5G.  The  verb  D7y  Jeremiah  uses  in  no  form.    The  expression    nj<  D'T^  occurs  only  here. — [Hknderson:  "  Be- 

fore  ^PnT^  7,  the  preposition  has  the  signification  of  wit/i  a  «te«;  to  ;  before  'nj^lC/i  it  takes  its  temporal  signification, 

•    T :  ~  ;  .  •   T  :  ~  : 

at,  at  the  time  of."] — HyiCi  once  in  Jer.,  viii.  19 ;  see  ver.  8 ;  Ps.  xxxiv.  16. 

Ver.  57.  31p  Jeremiah  uses  only  once  in  the  Hiphil,  xxx.  21. — The  Perfects,    j13"1p.  jTlOX,  of  this  verse  and  ri3T. 

.  -It  .  t:-'tt:-t  t:- 

n7XJ,  ver.  58,  stand  parallel  to  the  Perfect  nj.'OiJ'  ver.  56.    They  contain  the  specifications  of  that  general  declaration. 

T  :  -  T  T  :   -  T 

They  are  therefore  to  be  translated  in  the  Perfect,  not  in  the  Present.    ^X"^pX  does  not  conflict  with  this,  as  THENina 

thinks,  for  the  Imperfect  stands  here  to  represent  tho  repetition  of  the  act  in  times  past.     See  my  Gr.  ^  87,  f. 

Ver.  58.  The  expression  3'"^  3T  is  found  in  Jeremiali  twice,  1.  34;  li.  36.     Yet  Jeremiah  never  uses  the  plural  □^3''1, 

T 

which  occurs,  besides  here,  only  in  Ps.  xviii.  41  (2  Sam.  xxii.  44).  [The  singular  here  would  be  inappropriate,  if  the  mean- 
ing of  the  phrase  is  that  God  interposed  to  deliver  him  from  all  the  causes  which  endangered  his  life,  see  ver.  53. — 'C!/£3  J  is 
not  merely  a  circumlocution  for  the  suffix,  my,  (Notes),  but  '1^33  ^3'1  are  causse  quse  vitam  ac  salutem  meam  cmicernwni 

(Qbrlach),  dangerous  transactions  (Fuerst's  Lex.). — W.  H.  H.j — Jeremiah  uses  only  the  Part.  7><jof  7XJ,  and  that  only 

-  T 
once,  1.  34.    See  elsewhere,  Ps.  Ixix.  19  ;  ciii.  4 ;  cxix.  154. 

Ver.  60.  Instead  of  '7  several  Codd.  have  '7J?,  which  corresponds  better  with  the  way  in  which  Jeremiah  expressea 
himself  in  xi.  19;  xviii.  18  ;  but  is  apparently  only  a  correction  suggested  by  ver.  61.  See  besides  at  K3l7,  ver.  34. 
[Henderson  :  "  For  '7  twenty-three  MSS.,  originally  thirteen  more,  now  two,  the  LXX.,  Targ.,  Syr.,  Vulg.,  and  Venet. 
Greek,  read  '7y  as  in  ver. 61 ;  where,  on  the  other  hand,  seventeen  MSS.  read  "7  for   '''7J^."J 

Ver.  61.  n3"^n  is  used  here  in  an  active  sense,  as  in  Jer.  li.  51  ;  Job  xvi.  10 ;  Zeph.  ii.  8,  etc. — [The  difference  between 
'*7T^  of  this  verse,  and  ^7  of  ver.  60,  according  to  Owen,  "  is  occasioned  by  the  verbs  Thou,  host  seen  and  Thou  hast  heard. 
God  had  seen  the  thoughts  or  purposes  effected  against  him  ;  and  He  had  heard  the  purposes  formed  concerning  him.  He 
refers  first  to  the  purposes  carried  into  effect,  and  then,  as  it  is  common  in  the  prophets,  he  refers  to  the  purposes  previously 
formed  respecting  him."  This  difference  of  meaning  in  the  two  verses  is,  however,  entirely  due  to  the  verbs,  and  not  at  all 
to  the  prepositions,  which  would  even  better  express  the  ideas  Owen  attaches  to  them  if  their  positions  were  reversed, — 
hare  seen  their  devices  executed  7I'  upon  me,  and  heard  their  devices  devised  7    with  reference  to  me. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  62. — [This  verse  may  be  dependent  on  nVDK'  ver.  61,  Gerlach  and  most  of  the  translators  ;  or  on  ntO'SH  vea 

T  :  -  T  ■  T    ■  - 

63,  Thenics,  NAEaELSBACH.    To  supply  the  substantive  verb  VHi  sunt,  before  '717,  as  Eosenmuelleb  suggests,  is  altogether 

T  -  T  , 

unnecessary  and  inelegant. — W.  H.  H.]. — D'Op,  for  enemies,  is  found  in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  expression  'Op  3 />  li-  !• — 
{Vjn  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah  ;  [nor  anywhere  else  except  Ps.  ix.  17  ;  xix.  15  ;  xcii.  4.  It  is  an  unusual  word  on  which  no 
theory  of  authorship  can  be  rested. — W.  II.  II.] 

Ver.  63.— nrD'p  is  found  only  here. — ntO'SH,  see  i.  11. — nj^JJO  is  aw.  Acyd/u..    [Gerlach:  "  The  opinion  of  Boettchkb 
T   I  T    ■  -  T    •  :  - 

deserves  at  least  some  consideration,  that  here  as  in  Mai.  i.  13,  there  lies  concealed   in   the  O  a  HO  (quam,  quak;  what  a 

Saitenspiel  [derisive  song"]  1  am  to  them).    But  this  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  punctuation  and  receives  support  from  none 

of  the  versions  except  the  Syr.    See  Ps.  Ixxxix.  48."] 

Ver.  G4. — '7IOJ    3''iyn   is  found  in  Ps.  xxviii.  4;  xciv.  2 ;  Joel  iv.  4,  7;  Oh.  15;  Prov.  xii.  14.    In  Jeremiah  occurs 

only  "710J    U/'^,  li-  0- — DrfT    PIE'^OS  is  found  in  Jer.  xxv.  14  (a  place  critically  suspicious),  Ps.  xxviii.  4. 

Ver.  65. — H^JD  is  an.  Aeydji.    [Beoughton  translates  it  a  bursting  of  heart,  following  Chald^us,  K37    niT3ni 
T  •  :  T  •  •  : 

confractio  cordis.    Blatney  derives  the  word  from  Piel  of  t  J*3.  to  deliver  or  make  over ;  "a  delivery  of  the  heart,  that  is,  a 

willing  one,  to  which  the  heart  consents ;"  and  translates,  omitting  the  first  DH  7  on  the  authority  of  the  ancient  versions 

V  T 

and  one  MS.,  and  making  a  single  member  of  the  verse  in  defiance  of  accents  and  analogy.  Thou  wilt  give  with  a  hearty 
accor'iance  Thy  curse  unto  them.  Sept.  virepdiritrnov,  covering  ;  Vulo.  scutum,  a  shield ;  Syr.  sorrow. — W.  H.  H.]. — D /XD, 
from  bSx,  a  curse,  is  ait.  Keyoix.    [Sept.  and  Vulg.  seem  to  have  read  HxSn  from  TMir-     For  construction  see  Ps.  iii.  9. 

- T  1  TT :  TT 

''in3'13   ^T^}?'}?  super  populo  tuo  sit  benedictio  tua.    Rosenmueller,  Gerl.wh.— W.  II.  H.] 

Ver.  66. — <'\X\   Hlljl.    See  i.  6;  Isa.  xiv.  6;  Jer.  xxi.  15.— Of  the  root  IDK?   Jeremiah   UJes  only  the  Niphal,  xlriii, 
8,  42.— The  expression  *•"  'Dty  is  found  only  here. 


134 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


EXEGETICAL    AND    CRITICAL. 

Vers.  55-66.  These  twelve  closing  verses  con- 
tain a  prayer,  so  that  ch.  iii.,  like  chs.  i.  and  ii., 
ends  with  a  prayer.  This  prayer  is  divided  into 
three  parts.  In  the  first  part,  vers.  55-58,  the 
speaker  thanks  the  Lord  for  his  deliverance  from 
the  pit.  In  the  second  part,  vers.  59-63,  he 
reminds  the  Lord  of  all  that  his  (the  speaker's) 
enemies  had  done  and  were  still  doing  to  him. 
In  the  third  part,  vers.  64-66,  he  prays  the  Lord 
to  avenge  upon  his  enemies  the  evil  they  had 
done  to  him. 

Ver  55.  I  called  upon  thy  name,  O  LORD 
— Jehovah.  The  speaker  begins  by  recalling  the 
prayer  which  he  had  addressed  to  the  Lord  out 
of  the  pit.  HiTZiG  is  of  the  opinion  that  we 
have  this  prayer  in  Ps.  Ixix.  Dehtzsch  also 
concedes  that  there  is  much  to  favor  this  opinion  ; 
see  his  Bible  Commentary  on  the  Psalms,  1867, 
p.  438.  [The  caption  of  this  Psalm  ascribes  it 
to  David.  There  is  no  internal  evidence  suffi- 
cient to  set  this  aside  and  to  prove  that  the  Psalm 
was  written  by  Jeremiah  or  some  one  else 
'•  during  the  captivity  at  Babylon."  Its  appro- 
priateness to  Jeremiah  when  in  the  pit,  is  only  a 
proof  of  the  singular  adaptation  of  the  inspired 
psalms  to  the  wants  of  God's  children  in  all 
varieties  of  emergencies  and  circumstances. 
That  Jeremiah  repeated  this  Psalm  when  in  the 
pit,  is  most  likely.  That  it  was  present  to  his 
mini  when  writing  these  Lamentations  is  ren- 
dered probable  by  many  suggestive  thoughts  and 
gentiments. — Gerlach  and  Noyes  translate  the 
verbs,  from  ver.  55  to  the  end,  in  the  present 
tense.  This  makes  the  translation  in  some  re- 
spects smoother  and  the  sense  in  some  places 
more  apparent.  But  the  references  are  to  de- 
liverances past,  pointing  hopefully,  amidst  pre- 
sent and  unrelieved  afflictions,  to  deliverances 
yet  in  the  future.  For  this  reason  alone,  the 
preterite  sense  of  the  verbs  should  be  retained, 
even  if  the  difficulties  of  translation  were  greater 
than  they  really  are.— W.  H.  H.].— Out  of  the 
low  dungeon — out  of  the  hellish  {hiJUtschen)  pit. 
A  similar  expression  [differing  only  in  the  pre- 
position.— W.  H.  H.]  is  found  in  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  7. 
If  our  Poet  had  in  mind  Ps.  Ixxxviii.,  which  I 
regard  as  certain,  then  it  is  probable  that  he 
used  this  peculiar  expression  in  the  same  sense 
in  which  it  is  used  there.  Ps.  Ixxxviii.,  it  is 
true,  is  commonly  understood  of  an  affliction  of 
another  kind  (by  leprosy,  vers.  9,  16) :  but  there 
is  room  for  the  question,  whether  this  psalm. 
"the  gloomiest  of  all  the  lamentation  psalms," 
as  Dklitzscii  says,  does  not  also  apply  to  that 
gloomiest  of  all  situations  which  any  servant  of 
the  Lord  in  the  Old  Testament  ever  experienced? 
la  that  case  DTrinn,  hellish,  should  be  under- 
stood, not  of  Hades  itself,  but  of  the  Hades-like 
place  in  which  the  Prophet  found  himself.  It 
would  then  indicate  not  merely  tlie  locality,  but 
the  condition  of  the  Prophet.  [See  Gram,  notes 
above.  There  is  not  necessarily  in  these  woi-ds 
an  allusion  to  Sheol,  nor  is  hellish  pit  even  a 
correct  translation  of  the  words,  which  mean 
literally,  a  pit  of  low  or  under  places,  or  pit  of 
depths  ;  out  of  the  depths  of  the  pit,  if  not  an  exact 


is  yet  a  sufiBciently  accurate  rendering.  Gbr- 
LACH,  while  he  also  supposes  an  allusion,  in  a 
figurative  sense,  to  Sheol,  translates,  aus  der 
Grube  der  Tiefen,  out  of  the  pit  of  the  depths,  mean- 
ing perhaps,  figuratively,  the  infernal  regions. 
But  the  passages  in  which  this  and  similar  ex- 
pressions occur  do  not  justify  the  idea  that  the 
pit  of  Hell  or  Sheol,  /.  e.  the  place  of  the  dc.id.  is 
intended,  even  figuratively.  The  literal  sense 
out  of  the  jiit  of  depths,  a,  \)oq\\c.i.\  expression  for 
depths  of  the  pit,  is  ino^t  consonant  with  the  fact 
that  the  Prophet  alludes  to  the  time  when  he  was 
literally  sinking  in  the  mire  at  the  bottom  of  the 
well.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  56.  Thou  hast  heard  my  voice, ^ 
Thou  heardest  my  voice.  The  Poet  gratelnlly  re- 
cognizes the  fact  that  the  Lord  heard  his  cry, — 
Hide  not  thine  ear  at  my  breathing,  at  my 
cry, — [saying]  Side  not  Thine  ear  to  my  refresh- 
ment, to  my  cry.  This  is  not  a  prayer  wliich  the 
speaker  noio  addresses  to  the  Lord  [but  the 
prayer  which  he  did  make  when  he  was  in  the 

pit].  It  is  connected  with  '/''P'  ^V  ''^^ice,  as  an 
explanation  of  the  purport  of  that  cry,  and  it 
shows  what  the  speaker  prayed  for  at  that  time. 
— The  word  Hnn  [E.  V.  breathing,  Naeqelsb. 
refreshmenti  occurs  besides  here  only  in  Ex.  viii. 
11  (15)  [and  is  there  rendered  by  Sept.  di'di/'uf^f], 
signifies  undoubtedly  the  obtaining  breath,  nvd- 
ifw^cg  (see  1  Sam.  xvi.  23;  Job  xxxii.  20;  Esth. 
iv.  14).  It  is  not  synonymous  with  Pj^lKf,  cry, 
but  it  denotes  the  end  to  which  the  latter  serves 
as  the  means.  [The  sense  is,  as  given  by  Noves  : 
Hide  not  Thine  ear  from  my  cry  for  relief.  But  a 
more  exact  translation  is  given  byBLAYNEv: 
Hide  not  Thine  ear  from  my  relief  at  my  cry  ; — 
so  Broughton  :  Hide  not  Thine  ear  from  my  re- 
lease at  my  yrayrr.  The  verb  means  strictly  to 
veil  (and  is  so  rendered  here  by  Gerlach,  Veil 
not  Thine  ear),  and  then  to  conceal,  hide.  "To 
veil  the  eye  is,  not  to  look  at  what  is  set  before 
it;  and  to  veil  the  ear  is,  to  render  it  deaf  to 
what  is  said;"  remarks  Owen,  who  proposes  the 
translation  Deafen  not  Thine  ear.  Fuerst,  in  his 
Lex.,  says,  Tur7i  not  away  Thine  ear.  Calvin 
renders  it,  Close  not  Thine  ear. — My  breathing. 
Wordsworth:  "My  respiration,  my  recovery 
of  breath.  Comp.  Ex.  viii.  15,  the  only  other 
place  where  the  word  occurs,  and  where  it  is 
rendered  re.tpite."  The  word  relief  seems  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  use  of  the  word  in  that  pas- 
sage, and  exactly  to  represent  the  sense  it  has 
here. — But  how  are  these  last  words  connected 
with  the  first  words  of  the  verse  ?  The  difficulty 
wliich  has  embarrassed  commentators  here,  is 
one  of  Gerlach's  arguments  for  taking  the  per- 
fect verbs  in  a  precative  sense  and  rendering 
tliem  in  the  present,  which  apparently  meets  the 
difficulty.  But  the  objections  to  this  have  been 
stated  above  on  ver.  55.  To  supply  intermedi- 
ate words  and  thoughts  between  the  first  and 
second  members  of  the  verse,  as  Thou  heardest 
my  voice,  therefore  now,  in  my  present  exigency, 
hide  not  Thine  ear,  etc.,  or  therefore  I  now  am  en- 
couraged to  pray  Hide,  not,  etc.,  is  at  least  arbi- 
trary.*    To  regard  the  last  member  as  indepcn- 

*  DiODATi's  comment  on  thi?  verse  ia  an  instance  of  inter- 
pretation, where  a  fervid  imagination  sniiplii^  ideas  not  cou- 


CHAP.  III.   55-e 


135 


dent  of  the  first,  an  interjectional  prayer,  intro- 
duces an  abrupt  and  serious  break  in  the 
consecutive  flow  of  the  thought.  Besides,  both 
of  these  interpretations  are  open  to  the  objection 

that  r\}?D\if  f^p,  Thou  heardest  my  voice,  is  not 
equivalent  to  saying,  Thou  didst  answer  my  prayer, 
or  receive  it  favorably ;  a  mistake  that  even  Ger- 

LACH  has  fallen  into.  The  word  ^1p  denotes  any 
audible  sound  or  noise.  Thunder  (1  Sam.  vii. 
10),  the  blast  of  a  trumpet  (Ex.  xix.  19),  the  crack- 
ling of  thorns  under  a  pot  (Eccl.  vii.  6),  the 
rustling  of  a  shaken  leaf  [hey.  xxvi.  36),  the  sing- 
ing of  birds  (Ps.  civ.  12),  the  bleating  of  sheep  and 
lowing  of  oxen  (1  Sam.  xv.  14),  the  roaring  of  a 
lion  (Jer.  xii.  8),  the  shout  of  a  multitude  and 
clamor  of  a  battle  (Ex.  xxxii.  17),  etc.,  the  sound 
of  the  human  voice  in  speaking,  singing,  weep- 
ing,   etc.,    are    all    represented    by  the    common 

generic  word  /1p,  a  sound,  a  noise.  In  three 
passages  the  word  is  used  in  the  sense  of  rumor, 
or  the  bruit  of  common  fame:  Gen.  xlv.  16; 
Eccl.  X.  20;  Jer.  iii.  9.     When    connected   by  3 

or  7  to  verbs  implying  compliance  with  a  request, 
obedience  to  a  command,  acceptance  of  advice,  or  the 
like,  usage  allows  the  word  to  stand  in  a  specific 
sense  for  prayer,  command,  injunction,  or  the  like; 

as  Gen.  xxx.  6,  ^''pr'  V^^^  hath  heard  my  voire, 
i.  e.  my  prayer.  In  no  other  case  does  this  word, 
alone  and  by  itself,  signify  a  command,  prayer, 
or  speech,  or  words  spoken.  It  does  not  desig- 
nate articulate  utterance,  but  the  sound  produced 
by  speech,  or  aught  else  that  makes  a  noise,  or 
is  audible.  Its  meaning  is  always  evolved  from 
the  context,  and  when  spoken  words  are  intended, 

it  is  almost  invariably  followed  by  "IDN,  'T'O?,  or 
some  similar  word.  Its  use  in  Hebrew  is  so 
purely  idiomatic,  that  the  sense  may  often  be 
better  given  in  English  by  its  entire  omission, 
than  by  a  verbally  literal  translation.  This  is 
often  done  in  our  English  version :  Gen.  xlv.  2, 
he  -wept  aloud;  1  Kings  xviii.  27,  cry  aloud,  ver. 
28,  they  cried  aloud  ;  Neb.  viii.  15,  publish  and  pro- 
claim; Job  xxix.  10,  The  nobles  held  their  peace; 
Prov.  xxvi.  25,  when  he  speaketh  fair,  etc.  In 
Cant.  ii.  8;  v.  2  (see  Prof.  Green  in  Lange), 
and  Isa.  xl.  3,  6  (see  Ewald),  the  word  may  bo 
rendered  as  an  interjection.  Hark  !    It  is  obvious, 

therefore,  that  7ip  cannot  be  translated  prayer. 
'Vlp  nj^iDiy  can  only  mean  Thou  heardest  the  sound 
of  my  voice.  What  that  sound  was,  whether  of 
weeping,  lamentation  or  supplication,  is  left  to 
be  explained,  and  is  explained  by  the  words 
following ;  the  sound,  or  cry  was.  Hide  not  Thine 
ear  from  my  prayer  for  relief.  Similar  construc- 
tions are  frequent,  especially  with  Jeremiah. 
Jer.  iii.  21,  a  sound  ivas  heard  upo7i  /he  high  places 
— iveeping  supplications;  iv.  31,  The  cry  of  the 
daughter  of  Zion — ivoe  is  me  now !  etc.;  viii.  19, 
The  voice  of  the  daughter  of  my  people — Is  not  Je- 
hovah in  Zion?  etc.;  see  Jer.  xxxi.  15;  Ez.  iii. 
12,  I  heard  a  voice — Blessed  be  the  glory  of  Jeho- 

tained  in  the  words  themselves:  "Thou  hast  always  heen 
ready  to  relieve  ine  when  I  have  called  upon  Thee ;  0  con- 
tinue in  doing  so  now  at  this  present." 


vah,  etc.;  Job  xxxiii.  8,  9,  I  have  heard  the  cry  of 
words — 1  am  clean,  etc.;  iv.  16,  17,  I  heard  a  voice 
— shall  mortal  man,  etc.;  Ps.  cxvi.  1,  He  hath  heard 
my  voice — my  supplications;  cxix.  149,  Hear  my 
cry — Jehovah  quicken  me,  etc.  See  Isa.  xxviii.  23, 
24;  xxxii.  9,  10;  Prov.  viii.  4,  5;  Micah  vi.  1, 
2 ;    Prov.  i.  20,  22  ;    viii.  1,  4,  5.      In    all   these 

passages  the  woi-d  7lp  is  immediately  put  into 
expository  words.  So  in  our  text,  the  second 
member  of  the  verse  is   in  ai^position  with   the 

first  and  explanatory  of  the  word  7lp,  Thou 
heardest  my  cry — Hide  not  Thine  ear  from  my 
prayer  for  relief. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  57.  The  Poet  now  describes  what  the 
Lord  did  after  hearing  the  prayer  of  the  suppli- 
ant.— Thou  dre^vest  near  in  the  day  that 
— on  the  day  lohen — I  called  upon  Thee.  See 
Ps.  XX.  10;  Ivi.  10;  cii.  3;  cxxxviii.  o. — Thou 
saidst,  Pear  not.  See  Jer.  i.  8;  xxx.  10; 
xlvi.  27,  28. 

Ver.  58.  The  Lord  has  not  only  spoken,  but 
also  acted.  [Vers.  57,  58  are  amplifications  of 
ver.  56,  showing  how  the  Lord  heard  the  pruyer 
there  recorded. — W.  H.  H.]. — O  Lord,  thou 
hast  pleaded  the  causes  of  my  soul. — Thou 
hast  fought,  0  Lord,  the  fights  of  my  soul!  It  is 
evident  that  the  Poet  intends  by  these  conflicts 
(O'l'l)  the  attacks  of  his  enemies,  which  he  has 
j  described  in  vers.  52-55,  and  for  which,  from 
ver.  59  onward,  he  implores  vengeance.  That 
the  struggles  on  which  his  life  depended  were 
severe,  appears  both  from  vers.  52-55  and  from 
the  following  words  Thou  hast  rescued  my  life. 
[The  Versions  generally  take  the  words  in  the 
judicial  sense,  as  in  our  English  Bibles.  The 
commentators  fail  to  explain  the  significance  of 
the  metaphor.  Pool's  annotation  is  a  curious 
instance  of  blindly  unsaying  in  the  note  what  is 
said  in  the  text, — "  Thou  hast  been  wont  to  take 
my  part  against  my  enemies,  not  like  a  lawyer 
by  word  of  mouth,  but  actually  and  really  plead- 
ing my  cause."  Pleading  a  cause,  metaphori- 
cally speaking,  must  at  least  involve  the  idea  of 
securing  justification,  or  exemption  from  pun- 
ishment, before  some  legal  tribunal,  real  or 
imaginary.  This  idea  is  not  appropriate  here, 
nor  is  it  so  in  other  places  of  the  Bible  where 
the  same  Hebrew  words  are  similaily  translated. 
This  leads  us  to  doubt  the  judicial  interpreta- 
tion of  the  terms  used.  Dr.  Naegelsbach's 
translation  is  supported  by  Is.  xlix.  25,  /  will 
contend  with  him,  that  contendeth  tvilh  thee,  and  1 
will  save  thy  children;  xli.  11,  they  that  strive  icith 
thee  shall  perish  ;  xxxiv.  8,  the  controversy  of  Zion  ; 
Ps.  XXXV.  1,  E.  v..  Plead  my  cause,  0  LORD, 
ivith  them  that  strive  with  me :  fight  against  them 
that  fight  against  me,  where  the  first  clause  is  ren- 
dered by  Dr.  Alexander,  Oppose  my  opposers, 
strive  u'ith  my  strivers,  or  contend  with  my  con- 
tenders, which  is  recommended  by  the  parallel- 
ism ;  and  Jer.  li.  36,  E.  V.,  1  will  plead  thy  catis  ■ 
and  take  vengeance  for  thee,  which  Dr.  Naegel.*- 
bach  translates,  /  fight  thy  fight,  and  avenge  thy 
vengeance.  But  the  words  may  have  another 
meaning  still.  3^"^  has  an  acquired  sense,  from 
the  itlea  oi  conducting  a  cause  before  a  tribunal,  of 
managing  another^s  affairs,  and  also  of  protecting 
their  person,  property  and  rights.     In  this  sense  the 


136 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


word  seems  to  be  used  in  Is.  i.  17,  E.  V.,  plead 
for  the  widow.  J.  A.  Ale.xander :  ^'■Befriend  the 
widow,  take  her  part,  espouse  her  cause.  *  * 
The  common  version  {plead for  the  widow)  seems 
to  apply  too  exclusively  to  advocates,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  judges  ;" — a  remark  that  will 
especially  apply  in  the  present  case.  The  word 
seems  to  have  the  same  sense  in  Is.  li.  22,  and 
Jer.  1.  34.  In  the  last  the  expression  is  3'T  3'7 
D3''"^~nX,  E.  V. :  He  shall  thoroughly  plead  their 
cause,  Luther  and  Naegelsbach,  He  will  cer- 
tainly accomplish,  or  carry  through  (durchfiihren) 
thy  cause,  where  the  idea  seems  to  be  that  of 
zealously  and  successfully  prosecuting  the  in- 
terests of  another.  This  is  the  meaning  which 
Gerlach  adopts.  Thou  managest  the  business  of 
my  soul,  i.  e.,  as  he  explains,  the  affairs  which 
concern  his  life  and  his  salvation.  This  idea  of 
God's  controlling  interposition  in  those  matters 
in  which  the  Prophet's  life  was  in  jeopardy  seems 
to  me  the  idea  here  expressed. — W.  H.  H.]  — 
Thou  hast  redeemed  my  life. — Thou  hast 
rescued  my  life.  [The  propriety  of  connecting 
this  verse  with  vers.  5.5-57,  instead  of  with  vers. 
59,  60,  and  thus  dismembering  the  triplets,  is 
very  dubious. — W.  H.  H.] 

Vers.  59-68.  These  verses  embrace,  as  re- 
marked above,  the  second  part  of  the  prayer. 
The  speaker  here  reminds  the  Lord  of  all  the  evil 
which  he  had  suffered  from  his  enemies,  as  the 
Lord  Himself  had  seen  and  heard,  and  prays 
Him  (vers.  62,  63)  to  consider  well  what  his  ene- 
mies yet  continually  designed  against  him.  These 
verses  contain  a  brief  intimation  of  the  prayer 
which  he  presents  at  large  in  vers.  64-66,  that 
the  Lord  would  execute  justice  (ver.  59). 

Ver.  59.  LORD — Jehovah — thou  hast  seen. 
— By  these  words,  which  are  repeated  in  ver.  60, 
and  the  words  Thou  hast  heard  in  ver.  61,  the 
speaker  confirms  the  reality  of  the  deeds  of  which 
he  accuses  his  adversaries.  [They  are  also  to  be 
understood  as  expressions  of  faith  in  God's  love, 
and  personal  interest  in  His  saints.  Not  only  is 
evei-ything  open  to  the  eye  and  ear  of  God.  But 
He  is  observing  the  conduct  and  the  language  of 
those  who  injure  His  people,  with  jealous  indig- 
nation, which  will  eventually  break  out  in  judg- 
ments.— W.  H.  H.] — Mywrong.  The  Hebrew 
word  nn^i',  occurs  only  here,  but  the  verb  from 

TT-  " 

which  it  is  derived  is  found  in  ver.  36,  H^J^.  If 
the  latter  is  used  in  the  sense  of  bending  [de- 
flection, subversion]  and  in  particular  of  bending 
of  the  right  [subverting  one  in  his  cause],  then 
the  noun  here  means,  violation  of  right,  injury 
illegally  done  to  one.  [Calvin  and  Gerlach 
translate  the  word  oppression,  or  subversion,  sug- 
gesting judicial  perversion  of  justice.  It  is  gene- 
rally, however,  taken  in  the  more  general  sense 
of  wrong  or  injury.  Calvin  says  "the  word  is 
rendered  by  some  iniquity,  but  in  an  ironical 
sense,"  i.e.,  the  wrong  my  enemies  impute  to  me. 
But  the  word  is  with  almost  entire  unanimity 
takon  in  a  passive  sense.  Rosenmuelleii:  qiue 
mihi  fiat  injuria.  Noyes  :  the  icrong  done  to  me  ; 
so  Ijlayney  and  Boothuoyd. — W.  H.  H.]. — 
Judge  thou  my  cause— Judge  my  right.  [So 
Broughton.  Gkrlacu  :  Secure  to  me  right  or  Jus- 
tice. Literally,  it  is  Judge  my  Judgment,  where  the 
aoun  seems  to  be  taken  in  the   cognate  sense  of 


my  cause.  See  Fuerst,  Lex.  Notes  :  Maintain 
Thou  my  cause. — W.  H.  H.]  These  words  are  a 
pious  ejaculation,  anticipatory  of  the  prayer  fully 
detailed  in  vers.  64-66,  and  evidently  called  forth 
by  the  antithesis  of  ''^^^,  my  wrong.  To  judge 
the  right  of  a  man  is  to  bring  it  to  its  deserts  bj 
means  of  judgment.  A  kindred  passage  is  Jer. 
V.  28.  Comp.  Zech.  vii.  9;  1  Kings  iii.  28;  Is. 
xvi.  5.     [See  also  Ps.  ix.  5  (4).] 

Ver.  60.  Thou  hast  seen  all  their  ven- 
geance.— The  word  HDpJ  is  not  in  its  original 
meaning  vindictiveness,  as  Thenius  supposes,  but 
simply  ultio   [^taking  vengeance']   (comp.   W\  riOp^' 

Ps.  Ixxix.  10,  1^.D'n  nopJ,  Jer.  1.  28,  n'lDp^J  Sn, 
Ps.  xciv.  1,  etc.).  Here  also  it  is  vengeance,  but 
in  an  abstract-collective  signification,  inasmuch 
as  his  adversaries  had  executed  on  the  Prophet 
more  than  one  single  act  of  vengeance.  See  xi. 
20;  XX.  12.  [Calvin:  vengeances.  Gerlach: 
revengefulness.] — And  all  their  imaginations 
against  me — all  their  devices  against  mr.  Tlio 
Poet  seems  to  allude  to  certain  passages  in  Jere- 
miah, namely,  xi.  19;  xviii.   18,  where  this  vuy 

same  word,  niK'no,  is  emphatically  used  of  the 
machinations  of  his  adversaries. 

Ver.  61.  Thou  hast  heard  their  reproach 
— reviling — O  LORD — Jehovah.  See  the  intro- 
ductory remarks  above  on  vers.  22-24. — And 
all  their  imaginations — all  their  devices — 
against  me. — Twice  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah 
the  devices,  fll^E'rirs,  of  his  adversaries  are  spoken 
of;   twice  also  the  Poet  uses  it  here. 

Ver.  62.  It  is  better  every  way  to  refer  this 
verse  to  the  Behold  or  observe,  HD'Sn,  of  ver.  63, 
than  to  the,  JiyotJ?,  Thou  hast  heard,  of  ver.  61. 

T  :  -  T 

For  if  referred  to  what  precedes,  ver.  62  would 
contain  a  tautology,  because  what  is  the  product 
of  their  lips  and  their  thoughts  must  be,  in  any 
case,  substantially  the  same  with  what  the  Lord 
has  heard  according  to  ver.  61.  But  if  ver.  62 
be  referred  to  what  follows  then  we  gain  a 
beautiful  gradation ;  the  lips  indicate  what  the 
enemies  speak,  DJVjn,  their  meditation,  what  they 
think,  and  their  sitting  down  and  their  rising  up, 
what  they  do.  [The  position  of  the  word  Behold, 
HD'Sn,  in  the  Hebrew,  at  the  end  of  the  first 
member  of  ver.  63,  favors  this  construction.  Yet 
it  ought  to  be  remarked,  that  the  connection  of 
ver.  62  with  ver.  61,  creates  no  unpleasant  tauto- 
logy but  the  repetition  of  the  same  ideas  under  new 
terms  would  be  forcible  and  poetical — W.  H.  H.] 
— The  lips  stand  for  what  they  utter.  [Cal- 
vin, Boothroyd,  Henderson,  translate  speeches; 
Noyes,  words.]  See  |^J3  ^^^■>  ^P^t  or  languagt 
oj  Canaan,  Is.  xix.  18  ;  a  lip  or  language  I  under- 
stood not,  Ps.  Ixxxi.  6  (5).  Compare  'HiJ'f  N}flD 
utterance  of  my  lips,  Jer.  xvii.  16. — Of  those 
that  rose  up  against  me — my  adversaries  [so 
Blayney,  Boothkoyi),  Noyes,  Rosenmueller, 
Gerlach]. — And  their  device  against  me — 
and  their  thoughts  against  me.  Thoughts,  ^JH, 
meditation,  Ps.  xix.  15  (14).  [Blayney,  Booth- 
royd and  Owen,  render  the  word  muttering. 
Henderson  and  Noyes,  machinations.  But  the 
sense  of  meditation,  thoughts,  is  adopted  generally. 


CHAP.  III.  55-C6. 


137 


RosENMUELLER,  coffitotio. — W.  H.  H.] — All  the 
day  lonff:  a  particular  conspicuous  also  in  Jer. 
XX.  7,  8. 

Ver.  63.  Behold  their  sitting  down  and 
their  rising  up. — To  refer  these  words,  with 
TuKNius  merely  to  consessus  [sitting  and  delibera- 
ting together]  of  the  enemies,  is  inconsistent  with 
the  context  and  the  use  of  the  words.  For  evi- 
dently, according  to  the  context,  the  Lord  should 
observe  the  whole  conduct  and  doing  of  the  ene- 
mies, and  that  not  merely  with  regard  to  what 
was  common  to  them  all,  but  with  respect  to  in- 
dividuals. And  further,  according  to  the  usage 
of  the  word,  as  apparent  in  such  places  as  Ps. 
cxxxix.  -;  Is.  xxxvii.  28:  Deut.  vi.  7;  xi.  19, 
the  expression  indicates  the  daily  conduct  and 
actions  of  a  man.  [Grotius  :  otia  et  negotia. 
Calvin:  "  By  sitting  and  rising,  he  means  all  the 
actions  of  life,  as  when  David  says,  •  Thou 
knowest  my  sitting  and  my  rising,'  Ps.  cxxxix. 
2 ;  that  is,  whether  I  rest  or  walk,  all  my  actions 
are  known  to  Thee,  ^y  rising,  then,  the  Prophet 
denotes  here,  as  David  did,  all  the  movements  or 
doings  of  men  ;  and  by  sitting,  he  means  their 
quiet  counsels;  for  men  either  deliberate  and 
prepare  for  work  while  they  sit  or  rise,  and  thus 
move  and  act."] — I  am  their  music — song.  See 
ver.  14.  He  calls  himself  their  song,  their  sing- 
song (Ew.\ld),  because  they  busy  themselves  with 
him  all  the  day  long,  though  in  a  malevolent  and 
scornful  way.  As  one  often  hums  a  melody  to 
himself  all  day  long,  so  they  do  not  let  the 
thought  of  the  hated  servant  of  God  depart  out 
of  their  heads,  but  are  constantly  devising  evil 
against  him.  I  am  their  song  denotes,  then,  the 
result  of  what  is  said  in  the  first  member  of 
ver.  62  \_Thou  hast  heard  their  reproach'^,  and  the 
iirst  member  of  ver.  63  \_ohserve  the  lips — the  lan- 
guage— of  my  enemies'],  and  relates  to  the  all  the 
day  long,  of  ver.  62,  and  their  sitting  doivn  and 
rising  up,  of  ver.  63.  [I  am  the  constant  subject 
of  their  derision  and  merriment.  Wordsworth: 
"Compare  the  Passion  Psalm,  Ixix.  12,  I  was  the 
song  of  the  drunkards.  There  the  word  nrgi/iah 
is  used,  here  the  cognate  word  manginah." — W. 
H.  H.] 

Vers.  64-66.  In  these  last  three  verses,  the 
Poet  prays  directly  that  the  Lord  would  take  ven- 
geance on  his  enemies  according  to  their  desert. 

Ver.  04.  Render  unto  them  a  recom- 
pense, O  LORD — Jehovah. — according  to 
the  work  of  their  hands.  [Broughton: 
"St.  Paul  'ranslateth  this  verse  against  Alexan- 
der, the  copper-smith,  2  Tim.  iv.  14."  The  phrase 
is  borrowed  from  Ps.  xxviii.  4. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  65.  Give  themsorrow  (marg.,  o/j.s-^wacy) 
of  heart,  l^hou  icilt  give  them  blindness  of  heart. 
The  word  rendered  blindness,  HiJO.  according  to 
the  fundamentat  idea  of  the  root  |J3,  to  enclose, 
to  veil  (see  |J'  HiJ,  |J0),  can  only  mean  veiling, 
covering  [mAvfiua  tF/q  KafuVag,  veil  of  the  heart,  2 
Cor.  iii.  15).  It  seems  then  that  blindness  [Cal- 
vin, RosENMUELLER,  NoYES,  Gerlach],  Tiot  hard- 
ness [BooTHROYD,  Henderson],  is  meant.  See 
Deut.  xxviii.  28.  On  what  Delitzsch  {Psychol., 
p.  291 )  grounds  his  conjecture,  that  it  may  be  a 
name  for  madness,  1  do  not  comprehend.  [The 
opinion  that  the  word  means  madness  is  derived 
from    the   Arabic,  and   is  maintained  by  C.   B. 


Michaelis  and  A.  Schultens.  See  Rosen- 
MUELLER,  Gerlach.  See  Text,  and  Gram,  notes. 
— By  blindness  of  heart  we  are  to  understand  a 
reprobate  mind,  involving  the  idea  of  stupidity 
(Calvin)  produced  by  sin. — If  the  future  verbs 
in  vers.  54,  56,  are  taken  as  Imperatives,  the  verb 
in  this  verse  should  also  be  so  translated.  Give 
them  blindness  of  heart — W.  H.  H.] — Thy  curse 
unto  them, — upoii  them. 

Ver.  66.  Persecute  and  destroy  them  in 
auger — Pursue  (hem  m  wrath  and  exterminate  them 
— from  under  the  Heavens  of  the  LORD — 
Jehovah.  See  Deut.  ix.  14,  which  place  seems 
to  have  been  in  the  eye  of  the  author.  [Calvin, 
regarding  the  Heavens  as  designating  God's 
throne,  interprets  the  meaning  to  be  that  their 
destruction  should  testify  the  Divine  sovereignty 
and  Providence.  So  Fausset:  "destroy  them  so, 
that  it  may  be  seen  everywhere  under  heaven  that 
Thou  sittest  above  as  .Judge  of  the  world."  This 
is  very  forced.  The  idea  is  simply  that  of  utter 
extermination;  destroy  them  so  completely,  ut 
non  sint  amplius  sub  ccelis,  that  they  may  no  longer 
exist  under  Heaven.  Michaelis,  Gerlach. — 
Broughton  concludes  the  chapter  with  the  fol- 
lowing characteristic  note:  "Jeremy,  ch.  xxiv., 
told  how  the  men  of  the  third  captivity  should 
come  to  nothing.  And  Ezekiel  prophesied  only 
in  their  days,  but  they  would  fake  no  warning. 
This  threefold  alphabet  endefh  in  their  threefold 
and  absolute  destruction.  Yet  Ezra  was  of  that 
captivity;  but  an  infant.  And  of  Anathoth, 
cursed  by  Jeremy,  one  hundred  and  twenty-eight 
returned,  Ezra  ii." — The  enemies  of  Jeremiah 
returned  not.— W.  H.  H.] 

DOCTRINAL    AND    ETHICAL. 

1.  ["It  has  been  alleged,  that  some  of  the  pro- 
phetic portions  of  Holy  Scripture  which  foretell 
the  sufferings  of  Christ,  especially  the  fifty-third 
chapter  of  Isaiah  and  the  sixty-ninth  Psalm,  have 
no  reference  to  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  but  were  ful- 
filled in  the  person  of  Jeremiah.  True  it  is,  that 
the  language  of  that  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah, 
and  of  that  sixty-nintii  P-^alm.  had  a  remarkable 
applicability  to  Jeremiah.  But  why  was  this  ? 
Because  Jeremiah  was  not  only  a  prophet,  but  a 
prophecy.  Jeremiah  is  among  the  prophets  what 
.lob  is  among  the  patriarchs.  Jeremiah  is  the 
suffering  propiiet.  He  was  a  signal  type  of  'the 
Man  of  Sorrows.'  He  was  a  figure  of  Him  who 
suffered  on  the  cross,  and  who  conquered  by  suf- 
fering." Wordsworth,  Intr.  Jer.,  p.  ix.  "Jere- 
miah is  called  by  the  Christian  Fathers  the 
7ro/.w7rai?f(T-«rof  of  tlie  Prophets,  and  this  qualified 
him  to  be  what  he  is  also  called  by  them,  theaty/Ta- 
i?e(T7arr»f . "  lb.  note.  "The  Christian  church, 
from  ancient  days,  has  set  apart  the  Lamenta- 
tions of  Jeremiah,  for  her  own  solemn  offices  in 
the  week  of  her  Lord's  Passion  ;  and  in  con- 
templating the  Prophet  Jeremiah  sitting  amid 
the  ruins  of  Zion  and  pouring  out  his  sorrow 
there  in  piteous  cries  of  agony,  she  has  ever  had 
a  vision  of  Christ  hanging  upon  the  Cross,  and 
mourning  over  the  ruins  of  our  fallen  human  na- 
ture, which  caused  the  bitterest  pangs  of  His 
anguish  there."   V).,  p.  x.] 

2.  "In  this  chapter,  the  heralds  of  the  word 
are  admonished,  that  it  is  their  duty,  in  times  of 


15?8 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


great  ilisiress,  to  prescribe  to  their  hearers  a 
suitable  remedy  for  their  misfortunes,  the  com- 
ponent parts  of  which  would  be,  1.  The  recogni- 
tion of  sins  by  means  of  the  punishments  inHicled : 
-.  Confidence  in  God's  compassion:  3.  Earnest 
prayer.  As  for  the  rest,  this  chapter  compared 
with  the  others,  shines  like  a  star  of  exceeding 
brilliancy,  from  which  the  rays  of  a  variety  of 
doctrines  emanate  and  give  forth  their   light." 

FORSTER. 

3.  [I  am  the  man,  ver.  1.  "This  Lamenta- 
tion is  only  rightly  understood,  when  it  is  re- 
garded as  a  lamentation  of  every  pious  Israelite, 
— as  a  lamentation  which,  while  proceeding  from 
self-experienced  spiritual  sorrows  of  the  Pro- 
phet, has  its  truth  for  all  pious  Israelites,  in 
whose  name  the  Prophet  speaks.  Aben  Ezra, 
long  ago,  perceived  this,  and  indicated  the  indi- 
vidual Israelites  as  the  subject  of  the  lamenta- 
tion. In  this  opinion  later  commentators  mostly 
concur  (Rosenmueller,  Ewald,  Thenius,  Neu- 
mann, Vaihinger).  Ewald  finely  says,  in  con- 
nection with  the  close  of  chapter  second,  which 
is  so  barren  of  consolation:  '  Yet,  will  lamenta- 
tion and  despair  nowhere  end?  Then,  there 
suddenly  appears,  in  the  third  place,  a  particular 
man ;  the  very  one  who  can,  from  his  own  pecu- 
liar experience,  lament  most  profoundly,  so  that 
here  for  the  third  time  the  cry  of  despair  is 
renewed  with  still  greater  vehemence;  but  he  is 
the  one  who  can  also,  from  his  own  profoundest 
reflection  on  the  eternal  relation  of  God  to  hu- 
manity, come  to  a  right  knowledge  of  his  own 
sins  and  of  the  necessity  of  repentance,  and 
therewith  also  to  the  exercise  of  believing  prayer. 
Who  is  this  individual,  who  thus  laments,  thus 
thinks  and  prays? — whose  /  unconsciously,  but 
at  exactly  the  right  place,  passes  over  into  the 
we  ?  0  man,  he  is  the  representative  of  thine  own 
self!  Let  every  one  now  speak  and  think  as  he 
does!  And  thus,  by  the  direct  means  of  tliis 
speech,  begun  with  the  greatest  difiiculty,  the 
sense  of  pain  has  been  imperceptibly  lost  in  the 
exercise  of  prayer.  Thus  this  composition  shows 
us  how  in  the  wildest  whirlpool,  divine  compo- 
sure is  to  be  won :  each  one  must  win  it  by 
sinking  down  himoolf  into  the  full  earnest  truth  ; 
and  even  if  one  does  not  immediately  find  it, 
yet  there  is  no  more  likely  beginning  for  some- 
thing better  ;  wherefore  here  a  particular  indi- 
vidual is  set  before  us  as  accomplishing  in 
himself  this  most  necessary  work  '  In  this 
individualizing  lies  also  the  explanation  of  the 
7nanit'ol<l  points  of  *  resemblance  between  our 
chapter  and  the  Book  of  .loh,  from  the  passion- 
jii-srory  of  which  the  PropJiet  derives  lamenta- 
i.o.isau'l  images  tor  the  representation  of  the 
jiassionliisiory  of  Israel."  Dr.  Ernst  Gerlach, 
Kfa,;.  ./«■..  p.  81]. 

4.  Vers.  1-18.  "  Here  we  have,  at  first,  a  lamen- 
tation of  the  Prophet  Jeremiah,  not  so  much 
over  his  people,  as  rather  over  his  own  miserj'. 
.  .  .  Here  we  see,  that  the  pious  are  subjected  to 
two  ditterent  sorts  of  affliction.  One  of  these  is 
temporal,  affecting  the  body  or  worldly  posses- 
sions and  welfare ;  the  otiier  is  spiritual,  affect- 
ing the  soul,  when  they  think,  that  God  has  be- 
come their  enemy,  and  will  no  longer  be  gracious 
to  them,  but  will  reject  them  now  and  forever. 
The  first  is,  in  truth,  a  cause  of  much  suffering, 


especially  to  flesh  and  blood;  but  this  pain  is 
nothing,  compared  with  that  spiritual  tempta- 
tion, when  one  can  no  longer  confide  in  the  favor 
and  grace  of  God,  as  we  here  see  in  the  case  of 
Jeremiah,  who  so  ruefully  bemoans  himself,  that 
he  is  a  wretched  man,  who  must  bear  the  rod  of 
the  wrath  of  God,  who  has  thrust  him  out  of  tha 
light  into  the  darkness,  and  pursued  him  as  a  bear 
or  a  lion,  or  as  a  more  open  and  declared  enemy. 
David  also  experienced  many  of  the  same  temp- 
tations, as  we  find  ever  and  anon  in  his  Psalms. 
Thine  arrows  stick  fast  in  me,  and  Thy  hand 
presses  me  sore,  he  says  in  Ps.  xxxviii.  3  (2). 
I  said  in  my  despair,  I  am  cut  off  from  before 
the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  Ps.  xxxi.  23  (22) :  whilst 
at  other  times  he  had  been  so  courageous,  that 
he  said,  I  was  not  afraid  of  many  hundred  thou- 
sands that  set  themselves  against  me  round 
about,  Ps.  iii.  7  (6);  God  is  our  refuge  and 
strength,  a  very  present  help  in  trouble  ;  there- 
fore will  not  we  fear,  though  the  earth  be  re- 
moved, Ps.  xlvi.  2,  3  (1,  2).  This  sounds  very 
difl"erently  from  the  lamentation  here  of  Jere- 
miah, who  represents  God  as  his  worst  enemy. 
This  should,  first  of  all,  serve  to  comfort  the 
pious;  if  they  fall  into  similar  temptations,  they 
should  not  think  that  they  are  the  first  to  whom 
such  things  have  happened,  but  should  know 
that  many  pious  and  holy  persons  have  experi- 
enced the  same  trials.  But  to  the  ungodly,  this 
should  serve  as  a  warning;  they  should  consider, 
if  this  is  done  in  a  green  tree,  what  will  be  done 
in  the  dry?  (Luke  xxiii.  81).  If  the  righteous 
are  scarcely  saved,  where  will  the  ungodly  and 
sinner  appear?  (1  Pet.  iv.  7)."  W'drtemb.  Sum- 
viarien. 

5.  Vers.  1-9.  "  Jeremiah  speaks  here  in  hig 
own  name,  and  whilst  he  utters  the  grief  of  his 
own  heart  he  seeks  by  his  example  to  excite 
others  to  repentance,  for  the  key-note  that  sounds 
through  all  his  lamentations  is,  that  his  distress 
comes  from  God.  The  greatest  cause  of  distress 
is  this,  that  prayer,  the  only  resource  in  misery, 
avails  no  more.  Elsewhere  it  is  said,  ■  The  name 
of  the  Lord  is  a  strong  fortress,  the  righteous 
man  runneth  thither  and  is  protected,' — and, 
'  He  who  will  call  on  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall 
be  blessed,' — or,  '  Call  on  Me  in  trouble,  then 
will  I  deliver  thee,  then  tliou  shalt  praise  Me.' 
In  truth,  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  crowded  with 
testimonies,  which  promise  answers  to  prayer 
and  help  to  the  prayerful ;  indeed,  since  one  of 
the  titles  of  God  is  '  He  who  heareth  prayer,'  it 
is  evident  that  to  hear  prayer  is  founded  iu  His 
eternal  nature.  What  then  the  Prophet  here 
says  is  contrary  to  Scripture.  But  it  is  true,  and 
so  we  must  understand  Jeremiah,  that  God  not 
seldom  hears  the  prayers  of  believers,  whilst  He 
proves  their  patience  and  leaves  them  long  in 
darkness  and  uncertainty.  This  has  been,  as  it 
was  with  .Jeremiah,  ihe  common  exp  n'ieuce  of 
Christians,  who  have  been  obliged  to  observe  in 
themselves,  how  quickly  the  human  heart  loses 
courage  and  prayerful  ardor,  when  God  does  not 
hasten  to  our  help."  Heim  und  Hofmann,  die 
qronsen  Propheten. 

6.  "  The  Prophet  first  describes  what  he  him- 
self experienced  of  the  holy  cross  under  the  Old 
Testament.  It  was  necessary  for  him  to  be 
typically  a   sacrifice    for   all   people.       He  was 


CHAP.   HI. 


139 


obliged  to  this  according  to  the  purpose  of  God. 
God's  object  in  all  this  was,  to  use  him  in  His 
kingdom  to  the  end  of  time  as  one  of  the  most 
important  of  His  instruments.  In  this  respect 
he  is  indeed  a  real  type  of  Christ.  Although  the 
light  is  not  wanting  in  his  dark  sayings,  yet  it 
shines  not  nearly  so  clearly  as  we  experience  it  iu 
the  New  Testament,  by  the  testimony  of  the 
Apostles,  where  they  also  testify  of  their  cross. 
For  they  already  behold  His  glory  with  their 
eyes.  On  tkis  account  Paul  gloried  most  lovingly 
in  his  cross  and  his  weakness."  Diedrich. 

7.  "In  this  third  chapter  such  an  earnest,  in- 
tense lamentation  of  the  Prophet  is  written,  that 
many  have  regarded  it  as  referring  to  nothing 
else  than  to  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ. 
For  this  reason,  where  Christ  is  painted  with 
His  body  lacerated  with  the  thongs  and  the 
crown  of  thorns  on  His  head,  the  beginning  of 
this  chapter  is  found  recorded  in  Latin  on  the 
picture."    Eg.  Hunnius. 

8.  The  old  expositors  find  here  free  scope  for 
their  allegorical  interpretations.  Thus  Pascha- 
sitTs  Raubertus,  in  his  Preface  to  his  third  book 
on  Lamentations,  says,  "The  more  attentively  I 
examine  this — as  it  were — funeral  lamentation 
over  the  whole  body  of  the  people,  the  more 
profound  are  the  mysteries  which  appear  con- 
cerning Christ  and  His  body,  so  that  tlie  mourn- 
ful discourse  may  be  by  turns  interpreted,  now 
of  the  Synagogue,  then  especially  of  the  Church, 
and  then  again  of  the  Passion  of  Christ." 
Ghislerus,  p.  120.  And  of  Bonavbntura  the 
same  author  remarks,  that  he  says,  "This  is  so 
evidently  a  lamentation  for  Christ  and  His  mem- 
bers, whose  sufferings  are  here  described,  that 
it  is  impossible  to  find  in  it  a  literal  sense,  with- 
out distortion." 

9.  Ver.  2.  "By  light  he  represents  prosperity, 
hy  darkness  adversity.  Is  v.  30;  xlv.  7;  Iviii.  10; 
Job  xxii.  11,  on  which  last  passage  the  great 
Luther,  in  a  marginal  gloss  to  the  text  of  tlic 
German  version  of  the  Bible,  comments  very 
nervously,  thus:  Trouble  and  misfortune  are 
called  darkness,  happiness  and  prosperity  light. 
Here  the  verses  of  Camerarius,  written  on  2 
Chr.  XX.  12,  may  be  quoted: 

In  tenebris  vitfe  densa  et  caligine  mundi. 

Cum  nihil  est  toto  pectore  cousilii, 
Turn  nos  eiigimus  Deus  ad  te  lumina  cordis, 

Nostra  tuamque  fides  solius  orat  openi." — Forster. 

10.  Ver.  7.  "  To  God  nav  anopov  nopifiov,  i.  e. 
To  God  every  impassable  road  is  passable.  Of 
the  same  purport  are  the  following  sayings, 
which  are  worthy  of  being  observed  and  re- 
membered :  Philo  :  deficiente  ovini  humano  con- 
cilia incipit  divinum,  where  human  expedients  fail. 
Divine  begin;  Taulerus:  egrediente  natura  ingre- 
dilur  Deus,  God  enters  when  nature  exits,  Lu- 
ther :  te/npus  desperationis  tempus  auxilii,  the  time 
of  despair  is  the  time  when  help  comes.  The 
greater  the  need,  the  nearer  is  God."    Forster. 

11.  Ver.  8.  Bonaventura  refers  the  words  to 
the  prayer  of  Christ  on  the  Mount  of  Olives, — 
If  it  be  possible  let  this  cup  pass  from  Me  (Matt. 
xxvi.  39).  Ghislbr.,  p.  129. — "  The  Omnipotent 
God,  knowing  what  is  to  our  advantage,  feigns 
not  to  hear  the  cry  of  the  suffering,  that  He  may 
increase  their  usefulness  and  that  their  lives  may 
be   purified    by  discipline    and    they   may  seek 


elsewhere  that  tranquil  rest,  which  cannot  be 
found  here."  Rhabanus,  in  Ghisler.,  lb. — 
"  The  most  efficacious  antidote  (dXef(0dp/ia;;o)( 
to  this  temptation  is  Hope  (Heb.  xii.  3-1  Ij,  tu 
which  effect  are  the  sayings  of  Augustine,  Goil 
does  not  give  quickly,  that  thou  mayest  learn  to 
desire  more  ardently ;  and.  What  God  would 
give.  He  withholds."  Forster. 

12.  Ver.  8.  [Prayer:  '^  Grant,  Almighty  God. 
that  as  Thou  didst  in  former  times  so  severely 
chastise  Thy  people,  we  may  in  the  present  day 
patiently  submit  to  all  Thy  scourges,  and  in  a 
humble  and  meek  spirit  suffer  ourselves  to  be 
chastised  as  we  deserve;  and  that  wc  may  not, 
in  the  meantime,  cease  to  call  on  Thee,  and  that 
however  slowly  Thou  mayest  seem  to  hear  our 
prayers,  we  may  yet  persevere  continuously  to 
the  end,  until  at  length  we  shall  really  find  that 
salvation  is  not  in  vain  promised  to  all  those  who 
in  sincerity  of  heart  call  on  Thee,  through  Christ 
our  Lord.     Amen."  Calvin.] 

13.  Ver.  10.  "  The  real  appearance  of  the 
Lord  is  not  that  of  a  lion  or  a  bear  (Is.  xxxviii. 
13  ;  Job  X.  16),  but  of  a  Shepherd  taking  the 
most  faithful  care  of  His  sheep.  With  respect 
to  this  pastoral  care,  see  Ps.  xxiii.;  Is.  xl.  11  ; 
Jer.  xxiii.  3,  4;  Ez.  xxxiv.  16.  And  Bernard 
beautifully  says,  Christ  redeems  His  sheep  at  a 
costly  price,  feeds  them  sumptuously,  leads  them 
with  solicitous  carefulness,  lodges  them  securely." 
Forster. — ["  Harsh  is  the  complaint  when  .lere- 
miah  compares  God  to  a  bear  and  a  lion.  But 
we  have  said  that  the  apprehension  of  God's 
wrath  so  terrified  the  faithful,  that  they  could 
not  sufficiently  express  the  atrocity  of  their 
calamity  ;  and  then  borne  in  mind  must  also  be 
what  we  have  stated,  that  they  spoke  according 
to  the  judgment  of  the  flesh;  for  they  did  not 
always  so  moderate  their  feelings,  but  that 
soaielhing  fell  from  them  worthy  of  blame.  We 
ought  not,  then,  to  make  as  a  rule  in  religion  all 
the  complaints  of  holy  men,  when  they  were 
pressed  down  by  the  hand  of  God  ;  for  when 
their  minds  were  in  a  state  of  confusion,  they 
uttered  much  that  was  intemperate.  But  we 
ought,  on  the  other  hand,  to  acknowledge  how 
great  must  be  our  weakness,  since  we  see  that 
the  strongest  have  thus  fallen,  when  God  exer- 
cised severity  towards  them."  Calvin.] 

14.  Vers.  17,  18.  "All  other  temptations  are 
as  nothing,  compared  with  those  in  which  God 
seems  to  set  Himself  in  hostility  to  a  man. 
For  as  long  as  the  pious  taste  the  grace  of  God 
and  perceive  His  fatherly  tenderness,  every  ad- 
versity is  so  much  the  more  easily  endured  by 
them  and  they  can  t)e  joyful  and  of  good  cheer 
even  amidst  external  causes  for  sorrow.  See 
Ps.  Ivi.,  Ixii  ,  Ixxiii.  But,  on  the  contrary,  if 
God  disguises  Himself  in  some  severe  aspect  be- 
fore them,  and  dissembles,  and  acts  as  if  He 
hears  them  not,  is  not  favorably  disposed  to  them, 
but  may  be  in  the  highest  degree  opposed  to  them 
and  against  their  interests, — then  lamentations 
commence,  then  begins  that  secret  sorrow  of  the 
soul,  that  excessive  anguish,  under  which  they 
faint  away  and  must  sink  to  Hell,  did  not  God 
hold  His  hand  over  them  and  abridge  their  an- 
guish. These  are  the  buffetings  of  Satan,  the 
very  dregs  of  hellish  temptations,  they  are  the 
floods   of    Belial    that    will    overwhelm    human 


140 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


strength.  Then  they  [the  tempted]  lose  heart ; 
for  when,  as  it  were,  they  lie  in  darkness,  im- 
mured in  an  eternal  prison  of  every  kind  of 
trouble,  when  the  Lord  closes  His  ears  to  their 
pitiable  cry,  yes,  when  He  has  bent  His  bow 
against  them  and  set  them  up  as  a  mark  to  shoot 
against  them  all  His  darts  and  arrows,  when  He 
has  utterly  ejected  them  from  peace  and  all  that 
is  good,  in  all  respects  which  the  Prophet  here 
relates  in  detail  of  himself,  then  at  last  they 
come  to  think,  as  Jeremiah  did,  when  he  said. 
Ml/  strength  and  hope  is  perished  from  the  Lord, 
until  God  again  lets  the  gentle  suu  of  His  Divine 
heavenly  consolation  and  fatherly  goodness  shine 
out  from  amidst  the  darkness  of  the  temptations; 
but  in  the  meanwhile  they  must  for  a  long  time 
have  a  taste  of  that  future  wrath,  which  the 
damned  must  hereafter  eternally  suffer.  Besides 
Jeremiah's  case  here,  the  Scripture  presents  us 
with  a  pitiable  representation  and  sorrowful  in- 
stance of  a  man  thus  distressed,  and  a  special 
example  for  us,  in  the  case  of  the  patient  Job. 
.  .  .  David  also  in  Psalm  xxxi.,  /  said  in  my  haste 
I  am  cut  off  from  before  Thine  eyes.  Yes,  even  the 
Son  of  God  was  compelled  to  feel  in  His  holy 
soul  a  similar  spiritual  temptation  (yet  without 
any  sin),  when  on  the  cross  He  said,  My  God, 
My  God,  why  hast  Thou  forsaken  Me  ?"  Egiu. 
HuNNius. — "  What  is  here  written  by  Jeremiah 
is  not  new  and  unheard  of;  but  very  many  ex- 
amples occur  in  Scripture,  of  those  who  have 
been  harassed  by  this  same  temptation.  The 
following  examples,  however,  are  especially  ap- 
propriate here:  Abraham,  Gen.  xvi.  1  (2); 
David.  Ps  xxxi.  23  (22);  Ixxvii.  8-10  (7-9); 
Hezekiah,  Is.  xxxviii.  10,  Job,  vii.  15;  xix.  6, 
22;  Jonah,  ii.  5  (4);  Paul,  2  Cor.  xii.  9;  to 
whom  'nay  be  added,  those  most  eminent  Theo- 
logians of  our  own  age,  Matthesius,  Weller  and 
Hausmann,  and  especially  Luther,  who  was 
obliged  to  sit  in  that  sieve  of  Satan,  particularly 
in  the  year  of  Christ  1527,  about  the  time  .of  the 
festival  of  the  Visitation  of  Mary,  concerning 
which  paroxysm  of  his,  by  far  his  most  violent 
one,  D.  JoH.  Bugenhaguis  has  written  a  curi- 
ous account,  which  is  contained  in  Tom.  iii.  Jen. 
Germ.  Fol.  401."  Foester.  In  the  Leipzig 
edition,  this  production  is  found  in  Vol.  XXII., 
pag.  498  ff.,  under  the  Title,  "  Z).  Jo.  Pomerani 
und  Justi  Jx>nse  Ilislorie  von  Lutheri  geistUchen  U7id 
leiblichen  Anfechtungen  anno  1527." — ["Faith 
sometimes  is  so  stifled,  that  even  the  children  of 
God  think  that  they  are  lost,  and  that  it  is  all 
over  with  their  salvation.  .  .  .  There  is  no  doubt 
bill  that  the  Prophet  also  expressly  reminded  the 
faithful  that  they  ought  not  to  despair,  .  .  . 
though  the  devil  tempted  them  to  despair, 
but  that  they  ought  then  especially  to  struggle 
against  it.  This  is  indeed,  I  allow,  a  hard  and 
perilous  contest,  but  the  faithful  ought  not  to 
faint,  even  when  such  a  thing  happens  to  them, 
that  is,  when  it  seems  to  be  all  over  with  them 
and  no  hope  remains  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  they 
ought  nevertheless  to  go  on  hoping,  and  that 
indeed,  as  the  Scripture  says  elsewhere,  against 
hope,  or  above  hope  (Horn.  iv.  18).  .  .  .  Were  any 
one  to  ask,  How  can  it  be  that  hope  and  despair 
should  reside  in  the  same  man?  the  answer  is, 
that  when  faith  is  weak,  that  part  of  the  soul  is 
empty,   which    admits   despair.      Now,   faith    is 


sometimes  not  only  enfeebled,  but  is  also  nearly 
stifled.  This,  indeed,  does  not  happen  daily,  but 
there  is  no  one  whom  God  deeply  exercises  with 
temptations,  wlio  does  not  feel  that  his  faith  is 
nearly  extiugtiished.  It  is  then  no  wonder,  that 
despair  then  prevails ;  but  it  is  for  a  moment. 
In  the  meantime,  the  remedy  is,  immediately  to 
flee  to  God  and  to  complain  of  this  misery,  so 
that  He  may  succor  and  raise  up  those  who  are 
thus  fallen."   Calvin.] 

15.  Ver.  19.  "Just  as  wormwood  tastes  very  bit- 
ter, but  serves  many  useful  purposes,  so  the  cross, 
for  the  present,  seemeth  not  to  be  joyous  (Heb. 
xii.  11).  Nevertheless,  it  is  a  medicine  for  us. 
Wormwood  (Vermuth)  has  its  name,  thus  (wehre 
dem  Muth),  control  the  spirit  [temper,  or  mettle 
of  the  soul].  For  wormwood  restrains  from 
lewdness,  disperses  the  bile,  neutralizes  poison, 
and  destroys  all  bad  vermin  and  corruption,  all 
of  which  and  much  more,  in  a  spiritual  sense, 
is  done  by  the  dear  cross.  Therefore,  let  us 
esteem  this  our  spiritual  medicine."  Cramer. 
— "  Was  it  necessary  that  Christ  Himself  should 
be  given  gall  to  drink,  why  then  should  we  be 
able  entirely  to  abstain  from  the  like?"  Cra- 
mer. 

16.  Vers.  19-33.  "  We  see  here  that  there  are 
two  sources  of  consolation,  internal  and  exter- 
nal. The  internal  is,  when  one  is  sure  in  his 
heart  that  he  has  a  gracious  God,  of  whom  he 
may  expect  every  good  thing  in  all  difficulties 
and  distresses.  But  this  consolation  sometimes 
expires,  as  we  see  here  in  the  case  of  Jeremiah, 
and  from  the  words  and  sayings  of  David,  as  we 
have  shown  above  from  his  Psalms.  It  often 
seems  as  though  God  Himself,  together  with 
Heaven  and  Earth,  is  against  one.  How  now 
should  it  be  with  one  placed  in  such  temptation? 
Answer:  He  should  lay  hold  of  the  external 
consolation,  which  be  finds,  not  in  his  heart,  but 
in  the  Holy  Scripture,  in  so  many  and  divine 
consolatory  declarations,  which  God  therein  pre- 
sents to  us,  together  with  many  examples  in  the 
cases  of  those  to  whom  God  has  fulfilled  and 
verified  such  promises.  And  then  also  he  should 
carefully  consider  these  heart-moving  words, 
which  Jeremiah  here  uses,  which  he  did  not  get 
from  his  heart,  for  that  spoke  to  him  in  a  very 
different  fashion,  but  he  received  them  from  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  thus.  It  is  of  the  Lord's  goodness, 
that  we  are  not  consumed.  His  mercy  fails  not. 
but  it  is  new  every  morning;  The  Lord  is  gra- 
cious unto  him  who  waiteth  for  Him,  and  to  the 
soul  that  inquires  after  Him ;  It  is  an  excellent 
thing  to  be  patient  and  to  hope  for  the  help  of 
the  Lord  ;  He  does  not  cast  off  for  ever,  but  He 
is  indeed  sorry  and  moved  by  compassion  accord- 
ing to  His  great  mercies,  etc.  These  and  similar 
sayings  we  should,  in  great  temptations,  take 
hold  of  and  hold  them  fast  in  faith,  in  spite  even 
of  the  thoughts  and  objections  of  our  own  hearts. 
Tliereby  will  God  revive  in  a  troubled  heart  the 
internal  consolation,  so  that  one  can  say  with 
.Jeremiah,  Thou  wilt  be  again  graciously  mind- 
ful of  me,  for  so  my  soul  assures  me.  This  I 
t.ake  to  heart,  therefore  I  still  hope."  Wiiriemb. 
Summarien. — "  It  is  the  habit  and  custom  of  God, 
first  thoroughly  to  prove  men  by  affliction,  and 
after  that  to  hear  His  chihlren,  if  thoy,  as  tine 
gold  and  silver  tried  in  tlio  dvii.  arc  found  to  be 


CHAP.  ill. 


141 


clean  and  pure.  Aa  it  is  again  written,  Whoso 
adheres  to  wisdom  shall  dwell  securely,  and 
although  at  first  she  sets  herself  in  opposition  to 
him,  and  brings  fear  and  dread  upon  him,  and 
proves  him  with  her  rod  and  tries  him  with  her 
chastisements,  until  she  finds  that  he  is  without 
guile,  she  will  then  return  to  him  in  the  right 
way,  and  comfort  him  and  show  him  her  secrets. 
Sirach.  iv.  18-21  (1.5-18)."  Egid.  Hun-nius. 

17.  (Ver.  21.  Pr:iyer.  "Grant,  Almighty  God, 
that  as  there  are  none  of  us  who  have  not  con- 
tinually to  contend  with  many  temptations,  and 
as  such  is  our  intirmity,  that  we  are  ready  to 
succumb  under  them,  except  Thou  helpest  us, — 
O  grant,  that  we  may  be  sustained  by  Thine  in- 
vincible power,  and  that  also,  when  Thou  wouldst 
humble  us,  we  may  loathe  ourselves  on  account 
of  our  sins,  and  thus  perseveringly  contend, 
until,  having  gained  the  victory,  we  shall  give 
Thee  the  glory  for  Thy  perpetual  aid  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord.    Amen."  Calvin.] 

18.  Vers.  22-24.  "These  are  approved  texts 
and  cordials  for  all  stricken  hearts.  1.  God's 
mercies  and  compassions,  which  we  may  set  over 
against  God  regarded  as  a  consuming  fire,  Deut. 
iv.  24.  2.  That  His  compassions  fail  7iot,  with 
which  we  may  resist  the  temptation,  that  God 
will  no  more  be  gracious  and  has  forgotten  our 
affliction  and  oppression,  Ps.  xliv.  25  (24). 
3.  That  His  mercies  are  new  evert/  morning,  which 
we  oppose  to  our  temptation  when  we  are  com- 
pelled to  say  with  David,  I  am  chastened  every 
moi-ning,  Ps.  Ixxiii.  14.  4.  That  God  is  faithful, 
to  meet  the  temptation,  that  God  will  make  it 
too  hard  for  us  to  bear,  1  Cor.  x.  13.  5.  That 
God  will  be  our  portion  and  reward,  that  we  will 
be  richly  recompensed  in  Heaven."   Cramer. 

19.  Vers.  22,  23.  "The  whole  purport  of  this 
truly  golden  maxim  is  consolatory,  and  to  this 
end  it  is  to  be  pleaded  in  view  of  the  magnitude 
of  the  evil  both  of  our  guilt  and  of  our  punish- 
ment. With  this  accord  Rom.  v.  21,  and  Ps. 
cxxx.  7,  as  well  as  the  following  from  Augustine, 
God's  compassion  exceeds  the  misery  of  all  man- 
kind. The  abuse  of  this  maxim  is  fourfold. 
The  first  is  that  of  the  Epicureans,  who,  from 
like  passages  of  Scripture,  in  which  the  im- 
mensity of  the  Divine  pity  is  treated  of,  deduce 
that,  ancient  piece  of  jargon  (noKKvafibv),  Let  us 
continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  the  more  abound, 
Rom.  vi.  1.  The  second  abuse  is  that  of  Origen, 
who  concluded  that,  because  of  the  infinite  com- 
passion of  God,  the  damned  would  at  length  some 
time  or  other,  be  liberated  from  the  torment  of 
Hell  and  be  saved  (Horn.  ix.  in  Jerem.).  The 
third  abuse  is  that  of  Huber  {Samuelis  mort., 
1624),  who,  from  the  amplitude  and  universality 
of  God's  compassion,  presumed  to  fabricate  the 
doctrine  of  universal  and  unlimited  election. 
The  fourth  abuse  is  that  of  the  Photinians,  who 
80  far  expand  the  words  of  Scripture  concerning 
the  compassion  of  God,  as  blasphemously  to 
assert,  that  God,  out  of  His  mere  compassion 
alone,  forgives  our  sins,  without  any  compen- 
sation   and    satisfaction    rendered    by   Christ." 

FoRSTER. 

20  Ver.  24.  "Luther  has  finely  comprised 
the  distinction  between  hope  and  faith,  in  the  fol- 
lowing well-rounded  perind:  Faith  looks  at  the 
word  which  promises,  Hope  at  the  thingpromised, 


(^Fides  intuetur  verbum  rei,  spes  vero  rem  verhi)." 
FoRSTER. — ["Were  God  to  take  away  the  promise, 
all  the  miserable  would  inevitably  perish  ;  for 
they  can  never  lay  hold  on  His  mercy  except 
through  His  word.  This,  then,  is  the  reason  why 
Scripture  so  often  connects  these  two  things  to- 
gether, even  God's  mercy  and  His  faithfulness 
in  fulfilling  His  promises."  Calvin.] 

21.  [Vers.  24,  25.  "  It  next  occurred  to  the 
Prophet,  that  whatever  he  lost  or  suffered,  or 
witnessed  of  the  sufferings  of  his  people,  his 
grand  interest  was  secure.  He  was  satisfied  that 
the  Lord  was  his  all-sufficient  Portion.  He  was 
conscious  that  he  had  chosen  Him  as  his  portion, 
and  expected  his  happiness  from  Him,  and  not 
from  the  world  ;  and  therefore  he  determined 
still  to  hope  in  Him,  and  refer  all  his  concerns 
to  His  wisdom,  truth,  and  love.  In  this  he  evi- 
dently proposed  himself  as  an  example  to  his 
people,  that  they  might  seek  comfort  from  God 
when  all  other  comfort  failed.  And  though  they 
might  not  be  able  confidently  to  aver  tliat  the 
Lord  was  their  Portion,  yet  they  might  remem- 
ber that  He  was  kind  and  merciful  to  those  who 
wait  for  Him  and  seek  Him."  Scott.] 

22.  Ver.  25.  "  When  we  men  are  in  trouble  or 
temptation,  the  Devil  is  accustomed  to  portray 
and  represent  God  to  us  as  very  different  from 
what  He  really  is.  For  he  depicts  him  as  an  un- 
gracious, pitiless,  wrathful  Judge,  not  to  be 
treated  with,  who  would  only  kill  us  and  damn 
us  and  not  wish  us  to  be  happy,  and  thus  the 
Devil  would  frighten  us  and  drive  us  to  despair. 
We  should  remove  our  eyes  from  this  frightful 
image  of  Satan's  conjuring,  and  look  upon  the 
Lord  as  the  Prophet  Jeremiah  here  depicts  for 
us  His  countenance,  as  it  were ;  yea,  as  God  por- 
trays Himself  in  His  holy  word,  namely  thus, 
The  Lord  is  friendly  to  the  soul  that  seeks  after 
Him."  Egid.  Hunnius. 

23.  Ver.  25.  "God's  love  both  prepares  the 
way  for  and  rewards  ours.  Being  more  benig- 
nant it  precedes  ours ;  being  more  faithful  it  is 
returned  [by  ours]  ;  being  more  attractive  it  is 
sought  after.  It  is  rich  to  all  who  invoke  its 
aid,  yet  has  nothing  better  than  its  own  self.  It 
devotes  itself  to  the  deserving,  reserves  itself  for 
a  reward,  applies  itself  to  the  souls  of  the  saints 
for  their  refreshment,  gives  itself  in  payment  for 
the  redemption  of  the  captive.  Thou  art  good, 
O  Lord,  to  the  soul  of  him  who  seeks  Thee.  How 
gracious,  then,  to  him  who  finds  Thee !  But 
here  indeed  is  something  wonderful,  that  no  one 
can  successfully  seek  Thee  unless  he  have  first 
found  Thee.  Dost  Thou,  therefore,  wish  to  be 
found  that  Thou  mayest  be  sougLit ;  to  be  sought, 
that  Thou  mayest  be  found?  Thou  art  one  who 
can  be  sought  and  found,  yet  not  prevented  [prse- 
veniri).  For  although  we  say,  'In  the  morning 
shall  my  prayer  prevent  Thee,'  Ps.  Ixxxviii. 
14  (13),  yet  there  is  no  doubt  that  all  prayer  is 
lifeless  that  inspiration  has  not  prevented  {non 
prsevenerit)."  Bernardus  in  libro  de  diligendo  Deo, 
quoted  by  Ghisler.  p.  144. 

24.  [Vers.  25,  26.  "God  is  good  to  all  His  crea- 
tures; but  in  particular  to  them  that  wait  for  Him, 
to  the  soul  that  seeks  Him.  While  trouble  is  pro- 
longed and  deliverance  deferred,  we  must  pa- 
tiently wait  for  God's  gracious  returns  to  us  :  nnd 
while  we  wait  for  Him  by  faith,  we  must  seek  linn 


142 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


by  prayer  ;  they  that  do  so  will  find  it  good,  ver. 
26,  and  to  hope  that  the  Salvation  of  the  Lord  will 
come,  though  difficulties  lie  in  the  way,  to  wait  till 
it  does  come,  though  it  be  long  delayed;  and  while 
we  wait  to  be  quiet  and  silent,  not  quarrelling 
with  God,  or  making  ourselves  uneasy,  but  acqui- 
escing in  the  Divine  disposals ;  Father,  Thy  loill  he 
done!  If  we  call  this  to  mind,  we  may  have  hope 
that  all  will  end  well  at  last."    Matt.  Henry.] 

25.  Ver.  26.  "  In  the  practice  of  Christianity, 
hope  and  patience,  the  most  ethcient  of  virtues, 
engage  mutually  in  common  labors,  and  neither 
without  the  other  can  discharge  its  duty."'  FiJR- 
STER. — "  The  little  herb.  Patience,  does  not  grow 
in  every  body's  garden  But  we  are  admonished 
to  seek  it,  because,  1.  It  is  a  very  precious  vir- 
tue, and  a  part  of  the  service  we  owe  to  God, 
according  to  the  first  table.  2.  It  contains  in 
itself  another  virtue,  namely,  hope  in  God.  3.  It 
is  easier  for  us  to  practice  it,  if  we  accustom 
ourselves  to  it  from  our  youth.  4.  It  can  over- 
come many  wrongs,  abuses  and  outrages.  5.  Mis- 
fortune will  not  continue  for  ever.  Is.  liv.  7. 
6.  At  all  events  the  end  will  be  favorable.  7.  God 
does  not  willingly  afflict  us  [from  His  heart),  but 
always  designs  something  different  and  better  for 
us,  and  dearly  wishes  that  He  might  not  punish 
us  at  all  (Hos.  xi.  9)."  Cramer. 

["  God,  when  He  takes  ray  goods  and  chattels  hence, 
Gives  me  a  jiortion,  priving  patience. 
What  is  in  God  is  God  ;  if  so  it  be 
He  patience  gives,  He  gives  Himself  to  me." 

Robert  Herrick.] 

26.  Vers.  26-36.  "  These  are  admirable  and, 
beyond  measure,  comforting  words,  with  which 
the  holy  Prophet  opens  the  abyss  of  God's  mercy 
and  comforts  therewith  himself  and  the  people. 
As  if  he  would  say.  It  is  against  God's  nature 
to  subject  us  to  such  hard  dif^cipline,  and  to 
let  us  be  driven  and  injured  by  the  world.  But 
He  does  it  for  the  very  best  reason,  not  to  ruin, 
but  rather  to  edify,  not  to  grieve  but  to  fill  with 
joy  forever.  For  He  is  not  of  the  disposition  of 
the  children  of  men,  who,  if  their  anger  is  once 
excited,  there  is  no  end  to  it.  ButGod,  although 
He  causes  grief,  and  lets  His  wrath,  sternness, 
and  justice  be  seen,  yet  He  is  again  moved  to 
pity  as  soon  as  men  cordially  repent  of  their  sin 
and  transgression.  Therefore,  this  present  cap- 
tivity should  not  be  regarded  as  if  He  had  eter- 
nally rejected  His  poor  people,  and  would  never 
turn  their  captivity,  or  as  if  He  would  indeed  al- 
low His  captives  to  be  trodden  under  foot,  or, 
much  less,  as  if  he  would  subvert  the  right  of  a 
man,  or  allow  his  cause  to  be  turned  aside  before 
the  Most  High,  as  if  the  Lord  saw  it  not,  or  knew 
nothing  of  it.  Far  be  it  from  this!  He  knows 
and  sees  how  cruelly  the  tyrants  oppress  their 
captives;  He,  moreover,  graciously  regards  the 
patience  of  the  oppressed,  and  will  help  them 
again  according  to  His  mercies."  Eqiu.  Hunnius. 

27.  Ver.  27.  "  It  is  added  here  that  a  man 
should  be  accustomed  to  cross-bearing  {tj)  arav- 
iyxttnpiq)  from  his  youth.  And  we  may  also  with 
propriety  apply  here  that  saying  of  the  Poet, 
A  teneris  axsuesce.re  multum  est,  There  is  great  ad- 
v;intage  in  being  accustomed  to  a  thing  from  a 
tiiider  age.  For  patience  begets  experience 
(Horn.  V.  4), — experience,  I  mean,  in  matters  of 
cross-bearing.      Vexation    gives    understanding 


(Is.  xxviii.  19,  [Vulg.  and  Douay]).  But  what 
doth  he  know  that  hath  not  been  tried?  (Sir. 
xxxiv.  9).  For,  ;is  Nazianzen  puts  it,  ov  npoauna 
XpiaTiaviauof;,  a/.Mx  -rrlang,  Christianity  is  faith, 
not  outward  appearances.  And  Luther  says, 
Unexperienced  persons  are  merely  unprofitable 
theorizers.  But  since  it  is  of  advantage,  in  order 
to  become  more  fully  acquainted  with  any  course 
of  discipline,  that  one  should  be  subjected  to  it 
from  a  tender  age,  so  does  it  especially  conduce  to 
the  acquisition  of  experience  in  matters  of  cross- 
bearing,  if  one  is  trained  in  them  from  hisyouth." 
FoRSTER. — "Jeremiah  himself  bore  the  yoke  in 
his  youth.  He  was  very  young,  according  to 
Jer.  i.  6,  when  he  was  called  to  the  prophetical 
office  (in  the  13th  year  of  Josiab),  and  from  the 
beginning  he  experienced  much  opposition  and 
many  trials,  hence  after  eighteen  years  under 
Joakim  and  eleven  years  under  Zedekiah,  he  was 
able  to  endure  yet  severer  persecution.  The 
earlier  he  had  learned  to  bear  the  yoke,  the  better 
was  he  able  to  bear  it  later  in  life.  It  is  a  gold- 
en truth  that  is  here  expressed.  The  cases  of 
Joseph  and  David  also  confirm  it.  A  youth  of 
hardships  has  already  brought  forth  much  fruit 
of  godliness,  and  educated  many  staunch  men  for 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Therefore  be  thou  also 
reconciled  to  a  youth  of  hardship."  Calwer, 
Handbuch  der  Bibelerkldrung. — "We  ought  not 
only  to  bear  the  yoke,  but  to  bear  it  in  ouryouth. 
For  if  we  bear  it  late  in  life,  we  begin  by  exer- 
cising penitence  for  the  past,  rather  than  by  ac- 
quiring strength.  Let  us  then  anticipate  the 
flight  of  the  years  of  our  youth  by  suitable  dis- 
cipline, that  we  may  each  of  us  say,  0  God,  who 
feedest  [E.  V.,  Thou  hast  taught'\  me  from  my 
youth  (Ps.  Ixxi.  17) ;  rather  than  be  obliged  to 
lament  at  the  remembrance  of  our  faults,  saying, 
Remember  not  the  sins  of  my  youth  and  of  my 
ignorance  (Ps.  xxv.  7  [See  Vulg.])."  Ambrose, 
Serm.  2,  on  Ps.  cxix.  9. — Deus  vult  longi  prsdii 
militem,  God<;boo<es  the  soldier  who  has  passed 
through  a  long  fight.  Hillary's  Exposition  of 
Ps.  cxix.  9,  quoted  by  Ghisler.,  p.  146. — "What 
praise  is  due  to  old  men,  if  failing  in  strength  and 
having  been  released  from  long  continued  labor, 
they  prefer  to  take  their  rest?  On  the  other 
hand,  what  glory  is  due  to  young  men,  when  in 
the  very  fervor  of  youth  itself,  they  moderate 
their  lives  by  a  regimen  of  strict  morality  ?" 
Cassiodokus,  in  Ps.  cxix.  88,  quoted  by  Ghisler., 
p.  147. 

28.  [Ver.  28.  "He  has  learnt  that  necessary 
lesson  of  independence,  that  shows  him  how  he  is 
to  serve  himself;  to  give  no  trouble  to  others;  and 
keep  his  troubles,  as  far  as  possible,  in  his  own 
bosom."   Adam  Clarke.] 

29.  Ver  29.  '''71X,  if  so  be,  peradventure. 
"This  particle  affords  to  the  Romanists  no  sup- 
port for  their  fiction  of  doubt.*  Luther's  inter- 
pretation may  be  seen  in  his  marginal  note  on 
Joel  ii.  14."    FoRSTER. 

80.  Ver.  30.  "It  may  be  asked  here,  whether 
this  sentence  refers  to  toleration  [the  passive, 
non-resistant  endurance  of  evil]  ;  whether  the 
words,    if  any    one    is    strvrk    nn    the   cheek,    etc., 

*  rj.  e.,  in  regard  to  God's  willingness  to  pardon,  on  which 
they  rest  the  necessity  of  propitiating  Him  by  penance.-- 
W.  H.H.I 


CHAP.   III. 


142 


may  not  seem  to  support  the  Anabaptists,  who 
endeavor  to  prove,  from  this  and  similar  passages 
of  Scripture,  especially  from  Matt.  v.  39,  40,  that 
all  species  of  revenge  is  forbidden  to  Christians? 
But  a  distinction  must  be  made  between  public 
and  private,  and  lawful  and  unlawful  revenge." 

FORSTER. 

31.  [Vers.  31-33.  Prayer.  '•  Grant,  Almighty 
God,  that  as  it  is  expedient  for  us  to  be  daily 
chastised  by  Thy  hand,  we  may  willingly  submit 
to  Thee,  aud  not  doubt,  but  that  Thou  wilt  be 
faithful,  and  not  prove  us  with  too  much  rigor, 
but  that  Thou  wilt  consider  our  weakness,  so  that 
we  may  thus  calmly  bear  all  Thy  chastisements, 
until  we  shall  at  length  enjoy  that  perfect  blessed- 
ness, which  is  now  hid  to  us  under  hope,  and  as 
it  were  sealed,  until  Christ  Thy  Son  shall  reveal 
it  at  His  coming.   Amen."   Calvin] 

32.  Ver.  33.  '■'■He  does  not  afflict  men  from  His 
heart.  This  is  not  to  be  understood  absolutely/ 
{^d-^zXcJr),  but  comparatively,  namely,  with  respect 
to  [what  may  be  called]  God's  own  special  work, 
which  consists  not  in  afflicting,  but  in  doing  good. 
Briefly,  His  disposition  towards  us  is  like  that 
of  a  father  towards  his  son,  in  reference  to  which 
Augustine  very  beautifully  says.  He  is  both  a 
father  and  a  God  when  He  caresses;  and  when 
He  smites,  still  is  He  a  father.  .  .  .  With  which 
agrees  this  saying  of  Nazianzen:  Meli^ov  to 
fiirpov  T^g  ^iXav&puniaq  vnep  to  /li-pov  -yq 
TTaidayuyiag.  The  measure  of  His  philanthropy 
exceeds  the  measure  of  His  severity  as  a  dis- 
ciplinarian." FoRSTER. — "The  very  essence  of 
His  being  inclines  Him  to  bless,  therefore  it  is 
written.  He  does  not  afflict  from  His  heart  His  chil- 
dren of  the  human  race;  but  if  they  despise  His 
blessing,  it  is  His  to  smite  and  requite  them  with 
the  greater  severity."  Tholuok,  Stunden  Christ!.. 
Andacht,  XXII.,  5'.  120. 

"  Deines  Wesens  Weaen  nur  die  Liebe  ist, 
Streage  nur  bei  Dir  aus  lauter  Lii'lie  fliesst." — 
lb.,  Andacht,  A'SA'.,  S.  171. 

32.  [Vers.  34-39.  Prayer.  "Grant,  Almighty 
God,  that  as  we  are  at  this  day  tossed  here  and 
there  by  so  many  troubles,  and  almost  all  things 
in  the  world  are  in  confusion,  so  that  wherever 
we  turn  our  eyes,  nothing  but  thick  darkness 
meets  us, — 0  grant  that  we  may  learn  to  sur- 
mount all  obstacles,  and  to  raise  our  eyes  by 
faith  above  the  world,  so  that  we  may  acknow- 
ledge that  governed  by  '^^  .ly  wonderful  counsel 
is  everything  that  seems  to  us  to  happen  by 
chance,  in  order  that  we  may  seek  Thee,  and 
know  that  help  will  be  ready  for  us  through  Thy 
mercy  whenever  we  humbly  seek  the  pardon  of 
our  sins,  through  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  Amen." 
Calvin.] 

33.  Vers.  37,  38.  "In  respect  to  the  sins  of 
men,  He  is  not  entirely  inactive.  Not,  indeed, 
as  if  He  took  pleasure  in  their  sins,  or  moved 
men  to  commit  them,  or  had  ordained  men  to 
their  sins.  That  be  far  from  Him  !  But  because 
from  the  very  first  He  had  entire  knowledge  of 
them  (Jer.  xxiii.  24;  Ps.  cxxxix.  7-12  ;  Job  xxiv. 
23;  Sir.  xxiii.  27,  28;  Wis.  i.  6-10).  .  .  .  There- 
fore it  follows,  that  all  the  punishments  of  sin 
are  sent  and  controlled  by  God,  to  His  own  peo- 
ple, indeed,  for  the  purpose  of  discipline,  but  to 
the  ungodly,  for  their  punishment  (Is.  xlv.  7; 
Am.  iii.  6).  .  .  .  Therefore  that  is  an  execrable 


error  of  some  of  the  heathen  philosophers,  who 
taught  that  what  happened  to  a  man,  whether 
good  or  evil,  came  by  chance,  even  as  his  luck 
befell  him:  but  that  God  troubled  Himself  with 
the  afi"airs  of  men,  was  not  to  be  thought  of:  but 
that  He  sits  in  Heaven,  in  undisturbed  repose,  and 
lets  men  here,  between  themselves,  plunge,  wade 
or  swim  as  they  can,  since  He  takes  no  concern 
in  their  affairs."  Egid.  Hunnius. — "  Who  then 
can  say  that  anything  is  done  without  the  Lord's 
command?  This  is  a  precious  word.  For  first, 
all  adversaries,  however  lively  their  devices  may 
be,  are  only  messengers  and  servants  of  my  Lord, 
and  must  obey  Him,  when  He  has  purposes  of 
love  in  my  behalf  for  them  to  accomplish.  And, 
as  Luther  says,  Our  God  is  entire  Master  of  the 
art  of  whipping  a  rogue  by  the  hands  of  others. 
.  .  .  For  the  rest,  I  should  not  regard  the 
thoughts  and  devices  of  all  my  adversaries,  but 
the  loving  purposes  which  my  Lord  intends  to 
accomplish  by  them,  as  David  sings,  He  has 
spread  a  table  for  me  in  the  presence  of  mine 
enemies,  and  filled  my  cup  to  overflowing.  Whilst 
they  rage  and  roar,  be  of  good  cheer  and  say,  St. 
Peter  cannot  prevent  God  from  giving  what  He 
will.  .  .  . 

Ibr  lieben  Feinde  sorgt   so   viel,  mir  Noth   iind  Gram  zu 

machen, 
Seht  doch,  ihr  seid  Handlanger  bios  in  meines  Herren  Sacbenl 
Wohl  gtamte  icb  inicli  bitterlich,  wenn  icb  es  nicht  erkennte, 
Dass  doch  mein  Herr  der  Wundarzt  ist  und  ihr  nur  Instru- 

mente. 
Wie  selig,  wer  er  hat  erkaunt,  dass  aller  Faden  Enden 
Von  aller  Menschen  Werk  und  Wort  ruhn  doch  in  Gottea 

Hinden. 

There  is  then  only  one  real  misfortune  for  men 
on  earth,  and  that  is  Sin!'^  Tholuck,  St.  Christl. 
Andacht,  XXVIII  ,  S.  162. 

34.  Ver.  38.  "  Two  words  occur  here  which 
need  to  be  more  accurately  defined.  The  first 
question  is,  what  is  the  exact  idea  of  evil  in  this 
passage?  Calvin,  too,  broadly  extends  its  mean- 
ing 80  as  to  cover  all  the  evils  that  are  done,  and 
that  happen  in  the  world,  thus  not  obscurely  em- 
bracing all  sins.  But  from  the  context  even  a 
blind  man  may  perceive,  that  the  Prophet  is  not 
speaking  of  evil  in  general,  .  .  .  but  in  fact  of 
that  particular  species  of  evil,  which  is  usually 
called  the  evil  of  punishment.  For  the  evil  of 
crime,  as  such,  evidently  cannot  and  ought  not 
to  be  in  any  manner  attributed  to  God  as  its  au- 
thor or  producing  cause  (Dent,  xxxii.  4;  Ps.  v. 
5  (4) ;  Rom.  ix.  14 ;  1  John  i.  5  ;  James  i.  13) ; 
but  the  evil  of  punishment  is,  here  and  in  various 
other  places  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  imputed 
to  God  as  a  just  Judge  (Is.  xlv.  7;  Am.  iii.  6; 
Sir.  xl.  32).  The  other  word  referred  to,  is  that 
translated  commandeth  (to,  jubere).  In  the  He- 
brew it  is  HIX.  .  .  .  Calvin  twists  this  word  to 

T  • 

mean  the  secret  decrees  of  God,  by  which  He 
bends  the  purposes  of  men  hither  and  thither, 
according  to  His  own  arbitrary  will.  Whence 
he  infers,  that  nothing  is  done  without  the  com- 
mand and  foreordination  of  God.  He  adduce.s 
the  example  of  Shimei  [2  Sam.  xvi.  5,  10],  who 
had  command  to  curse.  If  he  had  understood 
this  with  reference  to  the  evil  of  punishment,  his 
words  would  have  borne  the  appearance  at  least 
of  truth.  But  what  Calvin  in  this  passage  makes 
so  broad,  that  he  writes.  Nothing  can  be  done 
without  the  Divine  mandate,  including  sins  like- 


144 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


wise,  cannot  and  ought  by  no  means  to  be  al- 
lowed ;  for  the  contrary  is  most  clearly  attested 
by  what  is  written  in  Jer.  xix.  5;  xxiii.  32; 
xxix.  23;  Sir.  xv.  10-22."  Forster. — ["Let  us 
now  see  how  God  commands  what  is  wrongly  and 
foolishly  done  by  men.  Surely  He  does  not  com- 
mand the  ungodly  to  do  what  is  wicked,  for  He 
would  thus  render  them  excusable  ;  for  where 
God's  authority  interposes,  there  no  blame  can 
be.  But  God  is  said  to  command  whatever  He 
has  decreed,  according  to  His  hidden  counsel. 
There  are,  then,  two  kinds  of  commands;  one 
belongs  to  doctrine,  and  the  other  to  the  hidden 
judgments  of  God.  The  command  of  doctrine, 
so  to  speak,  is  an  evident  approbation  which  ac- 
quits men ;  for  when  one  obeys  God,  it  is  enough 
that  he  has  God  as  his  authority,  though  he  were 
condemned  by  a  hundred  worlds.  .  .  .  But  God 
is  said  to  command  according  to  His  secret  de- 
crees what  He  does  not  approve,  as  far  as  men 
are  concerned.  So  Shimei  had  a  command  to 
curse,  and  yet  he  was  not  exempt  from  blame  ; 
for  it  was  not  his  purpose  to  obey  God  ;  nay,  he 
thought  that  he  had  offended  God  no  less  than 
David  [2  Sam.  xix.  19,  20].  Thus  this  distinction 
ought  to  be  understood,  that  some  things  are 
commanded  by  God,  not  that  men  may  have  it  as 
a  rule  of  action,  but  when  God  executes  His 
secret  judgments  by  ways  unknown  to  us.  Thus, 
then,  ought  this  passage  to  be  understood,  even 
that  nothing  is  carried  on  without  God's  com- 
inind,  that  is,  without  His  decree,  and,  as  they 
say,  without  His  ordination.  It  hence  appears, 
that  those  things  which  seem  contingent,  are  yet 
ruled  by  the  certain  providence  of  God,  so  that 
nothing  is  done  at  random.  And  what  philoso- 
phers call  accident,  or  contingent  (ki'(hxduemi'), 
is  necessary  as  to  God  ;  for  God  decreed  before 
the  worl  1  was  made  whatever  He  was  to  do ;  so 
that  there  is  nothing  now  done  in  the  world  which 
is  not  directed  by  His  counsel.  *  *  *  Now  they 
who  object  and  say  that  God  is  thus  made  the 
author  of  evils,  may  be  easily  refuted ;  for  nothing 
is  more  preposterous  than  to  measure  the  incom- 
prehensible judgment  of  God  by  our  contracted 
minds.  .  .  .  This,  then,  is  our  wisdom,  to  em- 
brace only  what  the  Scripture  teaches.  Now, 
when  it  teaches  us  that  nothing  is  done  except 
through  the  will  of  God,  it  does  not  speak  indis- 
criminately, as  though  God  approved  of  murders, 
and  thefts,  and  sorceries,  and  adulteries;  what 
then  ?  even  that  God  by  His  just  and  righteous 
counsel  so  orders  all  things,  that  He  still  wills 
not  iniquihj  and  abhors  all  injustice.  .  .  .  How 
much  soever  the  most  wicked  may  indulge  them- 
selves in  their  vices.  He  still  rules  them,  .... 
that  He  mny  punish  sins  with  sins,  as  Paul  teaches 
us,  for  he  says  that  God  gives  up  to  a  reprobate 
mind  those  who  deserve  such  a  punishment,  that 
He  gives  them  up  to  disgraceful  lusts,  that  He 
blinds  more  and  more  the  despisers  of  His  word 
(Rom.  i.  28;  2  Thess.  ii.  10).  And  then  God 
has  various  ways,  and  those  innumerable  and 
unknown  to  us.  .  .  .  Thus  we  see  that  God  is 
not  the  author  of  evils,  though  nothing  happens 
but  by  His  nod  and  through  His  will, — for  far 
different  is  His  design  from  that  of  wicked  men. 
...  In  a  word,  as  fir  as  the  Heavens  are  from 
the  earth,  so  great  is  the  difference  between  the 
works  of  God  and  the  deeds  of  men,  for  the  ends, 


as  I  have  said,  are  altogether  different."    Cal- 
vin.] 

35.  Ver.  39.  "  The  danger  here  is,  that  very 
few  sufficiently  examine  themselves.  Whoever 
does  this  will  discover,  how  God  punishes  our 
sins,  and  we  suffer  no  undeserved  distress." 
Heim  u.  Hoffmann,  die  grossen  Propheten. — It  ig 
usual  with  unrenewed  men  commonly,  to  become 
enraged  at  him  who  puuishes  them,  even  when 
their  punishment  is  entirely  just.  Thus  we  read 
in  the  Revelation  of  John  (xvi.  9,  11,  21),  that 
men  will  blaspheme  the  name  of  God,  who  pours 
out  the  vials  of  His  wrath  upon  them,  and  that 
they  will  not  repent  of  their  sins.  This  per- 
versity of  the  heart,  which  mistakes  right  for 
wrong,  and  wrong  for  right,  will  reach  its  ut- 
most height  in  the  last  days,  but  its  roots  reach 
back  to  the  beginning  of  the  world,  where  they 
started  with  the  lies  of  the  Serpent  (Gen.  iii.  4, 
•5). — "The  evils  of  punishment  are  only  the  ef- 
fects, or  fruits,  of  the  evils  of  sin  (Rom.  vi.  23  ; 
Jas.  i.  15).  Hence  Augustine  says,  with  great 
propriety,  '  Punishment  daily  increases,  because 
sin  increases  daily ;  the  chastisements  of  God 
continue  without  cessation,  because  crimes  among 
the  people  are  equally  persistent.'  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  Ambrosius  says,  with  truth  ;  '  God 
had  been  ready  to  change  His  sentence,  if  thou 
hadst  been  willing  to  amend  thy  wickedness  by 
penitence.'  "    Forster. 

36.  Vers.  40-42.  ["  How  are  we  to  get  the  par- 
don of  our  sins  ?  The  Prophet  tells  us: — 1.  Let 
us  examine  ourselves.  2.  Let  us  turn  again  to  the 
Lord.  3.  Let  us  lift  up  our  heart ;  let  us  make 
fervent  prayer  and  supplication  for  mercy.  4. 
Ld  us  lift  up  oar  hand ;  let  us  solemnly  promise 
to  be  His,  and  bind  ourselves  in  a  covenant  to  be 
the  Lord's  only:  so  much  lifting  up  the  hand  to 
God  implies.  Or,  let  us  put  our  heart  on  our 
liand  and  offer  it  to  God  :  so  some  have  translated 
this  clause.  5.  We  have  transgressed ;  let  our  con- 
fession of  sin  be  fervent  and  sincere.  6.  And  to 
us  who  profess  Christianity  it  may  be  added,  Be- 
lieve on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  having  died  for 
thee;  and  thou  shalt  not  perish,  but  have  ever- 
lasting life."  Adam  Clarke]. 

37.  Vers.  40,  41.  "When  Jeremiah  says,  Let  us 
search  and  try  our  ways,  and  turn  again  to  the 
Lord ;  let  us  lift  up  our  hearts  with  our  hands  unto 
Oodin  the  heavens;  he  reminds  us  of  tlie  proper 
method  to  be  observed  in  prayer,  namely,  sin- 
cere confession  of  sin  and  repentance  must  pre- 
cede our  petitions.  For  we  know  that  God  does 
not  hear  impenitent  sinners  (John  ix.  31).  This 
method  God  Himself  also  has  taught  us  to  ob- 
serve, since  He  says  in  Is.  i.  15,  If  ye  make  many 
prayers,  I  ivill  not  hear  you.  Why?  For  your 
hands  are  full  of  blood.  But  He  immediately  adds 
good  counsel:  Wash  and  make  yourselves  clean, 
put  away  your  evil  doings  from  before  Mine  eyes, 
then  come  and  let  us  reasoii  together.'''  WUrtemb. 
Summarien. 

38.  Vers.  39  42.  "  Here  two  very  different  kinds 
of  murmuring  are  indicated.  One  that  of  the 
ungodly  which  Lsaiah  has  described,  viii.  21,  If 
they  suffer  hunger,  they  will  fret  themselves  and 
curse  their  king  and  their  God.  But  besides 
this,  a  very  salutary  kind  of  murmuring  is  sug- 
gested, which  is  not  directed  against  God  or 
men,  but  consists  in  a  man's  being  discontented 


CilAi'.    iii. 


145 


with  himself  and  fretting  over  his  sins  and  for- 
saking them,  and  in  examining  his  life  that 
he  may  know  how  wicked  he  has  been,  since 
he  has  not  been  afraid  to  sin  before  the 
face  of  God,  most  holy  (Is.  Ixiv.  6  ;  Dan.  ix. 
6-14).  .  .  .  But  that  prayer  and  confession  of 
sins  may  be  acceptable  to  God,  it  is  required, 
that  not  only  the  mouth  may  pray,  but,  as  Jere- 
miah says,  the  heart  and  the  hands  must  be 
lifted  up  to  heaven.  For  where  the  mouth  only 
prays,  and  the  heart  is  not  in  it,  God  esteems 
such  spiritless  prayer  as  little  as  the  prayer  of 
those  Pharisees  and  heathen,  who,  when  they 
wished  to  pray,  babbled  much  with  their  mouths, 
without  spirit  or  sincerity  (Matt.  vi.  5-8  ;  Is. 
xxix.  13).  .  .  .  Yet  we  learn  from  these  few  brief 
words  of  the  Prophet  Jeremiah,  that  prayer  is 
not  to  be  deferred  too  long,  nor  delayed  by  im- 
penitence. Otherwise  it  will  be  too  late  to  call 
on  God  and  come  to  Him  with  prayer,  as  hap- 
pened to  the  Jews,  who  delayed  their  repentance 
and  prayer  till  God's  wrath  was  already  kindled. 
And  when  they  afterwards  called  on  God,  it 
availed  nothing  (with  regard  to  averting  spiri- 
tual punishment),  therefore  they  uttered  this 
lamentation.  Thou  hast  covered  Thyself  with  a 
cloud,  that  no  prayer  could  pass  through  (Is. 
i.  15;  lix.  1-3;   Mic.  iii.  4;   Prov.  i.  28.)"    Egib. 

HUNNIUS. 

89.  Ver.  41.  "In  such  prayer  we  must  perse- 
vere, and  not  as  it  were  desist  if  help  does  not 
come  immediately,  but  must  always  continue  to 
pray,  till  the  Lord  look  down  from  Heaven  and 
behold  us,  as  Jeremiah  here  says.  For  God  has 
not  such  tender  ears  that  He  would  soon  grow 
weary  of  hearing,  as  those  men  of  whom  it  is 
said,  a  beggar  may  be  neither  poor  nor  worthy, 
— but  they  will  treat  him  graciously,  if  he  per- 
sist tenaciously  in  his  entreaties  (Luke  xi.  9  ; 
Col.  iv.  2 ;  1  Thess.  v.  17)."  Wurtemb.  Summa- 
rien. 

Ut  tua  pertingat  penetretque  in  oratio  ecelum, 

Corde  sit  ex  puro,  sit  brevis  atque  frequens. — Forster. 

['*ie<MS  lift  up  our  heart  with  our  hands, — the 
antidote  to  hypocrisy.  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  4  ;  1  Tim. 
ii.  8."  Fausset]. 

40.  Vers.  42,  43.  ["The  Prophet  proceeded 
to  direct  the  confessions  of  his  people  and  to  put 
words  into  their  mouths.  He  humbly  acknow- 
ledges that  they  had  transgressed  and  rebelled 
against  God ;  and  as  He  had  not  pardoned,  it  was 
plain  they  had  not  repented ;  this  was  the  cause 
of  all  their  miseries,  of  which  he  led  them  hum- 
bly and  submissively  to  complain  to  the  Lord. 
He  had  covered  them  with  His  anger,  pursued 
them  by  His  judgments,  and  destroyed  them 
without  pity :  and  He  had  so  covered  Himself 
with  a  thick  cloud,  that  their  prayers  could  find 
no  admission.  The  hypocritical  prayers  of  the 
people  for  deliverance  were  rejected;  and  even 
the  fervent  prayers  of  the  Prophet  in  that  be- 
half were  discouraged."  Scott. — "  If  the  Lord 
has  not  pardoned  our  sins,  we  may  be  sure,  that 
it  is  because  we  have  not  repented  and  believed 
His  Gospel :  yet  we  may  be  forgiven,  even  though 
we  have  not  the  comfort  of  i".  '     Scott.] 

41.  Ver.  44.  "  This  cloud  its  not  physical  but 
mystical,  a  cloud,  namely,  condensed  from  the 
mists  and  vapors  of  our  sins,  the  Holy  Spirit 
thus  interpreting  it  in  Is.  lix.  1,  2  ;  Ps.  Ixvi.  18  ; 

10 


John  ix.  31.  With  which  agrees  that  saying  of 
Augustine,  Prxfacti  peccatores  sunt  Dei  illusores 
nan  oratores,  Hardened  sinners  mock  God,  they 
do  not  pray  to  Him.  If  therefore  we  wish  our 
prayers  to  be  heard,  this  cloud  must  be  dispersed 
by  true  and  sincere  repentance,  as  Isaiah  ex- 
horts, i.  15-18."  Forster. — "However  it  may 
have  an  angry  and  threatening  appearance,  that 
God  should  draw  a  dark  cloud-covering  over  His 
face,  yet  after  all  it  is  no  iron  wall,  but  only  a 
cloud  that  may  be  easily  dissipated,  and  when 
God  removes  our  sins  as  a  veil  (Is.  xliv.  22), 
then  He  drives  this  cloud  away."    Cbamer. 

42.  Vers.  44-49.  ["The prolonging  of  troubles 
is  sometimes  a  temptation,  even  to  praying 
people,  to  question  whether  God  be  what  they 
have  always  believed  Him  to  be,  a  prayer-hear- 
ing God;  and  the  distresses  of  God's  people 
sometimes  prevail  to  that  degree,  that  they  can- 
not find  any  footing  for  their  faith,  nor  keep 
their  head  above  water,  with  any  comfortable 
expectation."    Henry.] 

43.  Ver.  50.  "  Till  the  Lord  behold  from  Heaven. 
This  phrase  is  found  also  in  Ps.  cii.  20  (19); 
xiv.  2  ;  xxxiii.  13 ;  Gen.  xviii.  21.  Zanchius 
(f  1590)  endeavors  to  prove  from  this  expression 
that  Heaven  in  which  God  is  said  to  dwell,  is 
a  place  in  the  created  universe  {ens  creatum) 
above  the  visible  heavens.  But  this  is  absurd. 
For  it  would  fallow,  1.  That  God  is  not  every- 
where, but  is  contained  in  Heaven,  which  is  con- 
trary to  the  doctrine  taught  in  1  Kings  viii.  27. 
2.  That  the  birds  in  the  air  are  nearer  God,  than 
are  the  pious  and  faithful  on  earth ;  thus  Au- 
gustine argues  (Book  2,  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  ch.  ix.).  If  the  habitation  of  God  is  be- 
lieved to  be  in  the  Heavens,  regarded  as  the 
higher  parts  of  the  world,  then  the  birds  are  ia 
reality  better  oflF  than  we,  for  their  life  is  nearer 
to  God."    Forster. 

44.  Ver.  51.  "His  grief  is  so  great,  that  it  ia 
not  diminished  by  tears  (as  it  ought  to  be,  accord- 
ing to  the  ordinary  course  of  nature),  as  the 
Poet  says, 

ExpUtur  lacrymis,  tgeriturqm.  dolor, 

\^Ovid,  Tristia,  4,  3,  38],  (appeased  by  tears  and 
spent  is  grief),  but  rather  is  so  intensified  that 
it  consumes  his  soul,  i.  e.  his  life,  the  heart,  the 
seat  of  life,  being  consumed."    Forster. 

45.  Ver.  53.  "  We  are  aroused  to  fervent 
prayer,  by  our  own  special  calamity,  as  by  an 
alarm-bell.  Thus  the  people  of  God  here  ac- 
knowledge, that  in  the  deepest  anguish,  when 
almost  sunk  into  the  ground  in  the  graves  of  the 
lost,  they  had  called  on  the  name  of  the  Lord 
and  had  been  heard.  As  often  then  as  God  now 
casts  a  man  into  the  grave,  that  is  to  say,  lets 
him  sink  into  some  temporal  misfortune  or  men- 
tal despair,  he  should  remember  that  he  is  thereby 
summoned  to  prayer,  that  he  should  lift  his  heart 
to  God  and  call  upon  Him  with  sighing  and 
weeping."    Eg.  Hunnius. 

46.  Ver.  55.  "  Tiie  prayer  of  the  righteous, 
says  Augustine,  is  the  key  of  Heaven;  as  prayer 
ascends,  the  compassion  of  God  descends."  For- 
ster. 

47.  Vers.  48-66.  "Jeremiah  thought  that  in- 
justice was  done  him,  although  he  did  not  regard 
himself  as    innocent   before    God,  but   ascribed 


14G 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


everything  that  befell  him  and  his  people,  to  his 
own  sins  and  to  the  sins  of  the  people ;  yet  he  held 
that  injustice  was  done  him  by  his  enemies,  who 
persecuted  him  on  account  of  the  word  of  God. 
And  in  the  same  way  may  one,  when  he  suffers 
wrong  from  his  enemies,  appeal  to  his  innocence 
before  God  and  men,  as  David  says.  Lord  do  me 
justice,  for  I  am  innocent  (Ps.  xxvi.  1).  But 
before  God  no  one  siiould  esteem  himself  guilt- 
less, but  we  should  remember  that  the  evil  which 
befalls  us  undeservedly  at  the  hands  of  our 
enemies,  is  deservedly  sent  upon  us  by  God,  on 
account  of  other  sins,  that  we  should  repent  of. 
In  repentance,  moreover,  no  one  should  look 
and  wait  for  others,  before  he  himself  makes  a 
beginning,  but  as  Jeremiah  here  sets  an  example 
of  repentance  before  others,  so  should  every  one 
else  do.  Then,  at  least,  there  will  be  a  general 
repentance,  and  God  will  regard  our  repentance 
and  will  hear  us  according  to  His  promise,  for 
which  we  shall  praise  Him  for  ever  and  ever. 
Amen."     W'drtemb.  Summarien. 

48.  Ver.  57.  ["Fear  not.  How  powerful  is 
this  word  when  spoken  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
to  a  disconsolate  heart.  To  every  mourner  we 
may  say,  on  the  authority  of  God,  Fear  not! 
God  will  plead  thy  cause,  and  redeem  thy  soul." 
Clarke.] 

49.  Ver.  60.  ["  Thou  hast  seen.  Every- 
thing is  open  to  the  eye  of  God.  Distressed 
soul!  though  thou  knowest.  not  ichat  thy  enemies 
meditate  against  thee ;  yet  He  who  loves  thee 
does,  and  will  infallibly  defeat  all  their  plots, 
and  save  thee."  Clakke. — "  As  soon  as  any  trial 
assails  us,  we  imagine  that  God  is  turned  away 
from  us  ;  and  thus  our  flesh  tempts  us  to  despair. 
It  is  hence  necessary  that  the  faithful  should  in 
this  respect  struggle  with  themselves  and  feel 
assured  that  God  has  seen  them.  Though,  then, 
human  reason  may  say,  that  God  does  not  see, 
but  neglect  and  disregard  His  people,  yet  on  the 
other  hand,  this  doctrine  ought  to  sustain  them, 
it  being  certain  that  God  does  see  them.  This 
is  the  reason  why  David  so  often  uses  this  mode 
of  expression."  Calvin.] 

50.  Ver.  60.  "  Quse  hie  tormenia,  erunt  illic  orna- 
menta.  What  are  our  torments  here,  will  be  our 
ornaments  there."    Augustine. 

51.  Vers.  64-66.  With  regard  to  prayer  against 
enemies,  see  Doctrinal  and  Ethical  remarks 
on  i.  20-22.— [Prayer.  "  Grant,  Almighty  God, 
that  as  at  this  day  ungodly  men  and  wholly  re- 
probate so  arrogantly  rise  up  against  Thy 
Church,  we  may  learn  to  flee  to  Thee,  and  to 
hide  ourselves  under  the  shadow  of  Thy  wings, 
and  fully  to  hope  for  Thy  salvation  ;  and  that, 
however  disturbed  the  state  of  things  may  be, 
we  may  yet  never  doubt  but  that  Thou  wilt  be 
propitious  to  us,  since  we  have  so  often  found 
Thee  to  be  our  deliverer;  and  that  we  may  tlius 
persevere  in  confidence  of  Thy  grace  and  mercy, 
and  be  also  roused  by  this  incentive  to  pray  to 
Thee,  until  having  gone  through  all  our  miseries, 
we  shall  at  length  enjoy  tUat  blessed  rest  which 
Thou  hast  promised  to  us  through  Christ  Jesus 
our  Lord.     Amen."    Calvin.] 

HOMILETICAL   AND    PRACTICAL. 

1.  Vers.  1-18.    The  lamentation  of  the   Prophet. 


1.  A  source  of  consolation  to  the  pious  in  severe 
temptation.  2.  A  solemn  warning  to  the  ungodly. 
"We  learn,  here,  how  God  often  permits  even 
His  dearest  children  and  the  most  holy  of  His 
chosen  ones  to  be  deeply  tempted  on  earth,  that 
they  may  have  to  some  extent  a  taste  of  the  agony 
of  Hell.  .  .  .  But  the  ungodly,  who  live  in  this 
world  tranquilly  and  happily,  should  regard  the 
case  of  the  righteous  as  a  mournful  foretokening 
of  the  pains  of  Hell,  whereby  they  will  yet,  at 
some  time,  as  by  a  mighty  thunder-clap,  be 
awakened  out  of  their  profound  and  dangerous 
sleep  of  false  security."    Eg.  Hunnius. 

2.  Vers.  19-21.  How  he  who  is  tempted  should 
strengthen  himself  in  severe  affliction.  1.  He  should 
lament  his  sorrow  unto  the  Lord  (pour  out  his 
heart  before  Him,  Ps.  Ixii.  9  (8)  ,•  cii.  1  {title) ; 
cxlii.  3  (2)).  2.  He  should  be  assured  that  God 
is  mindful  of  him  (by  Christ  we  have  the  know- 
ledge of  Divine  Adoption,  Rom.  viii.  15,  16).  3. 
He  should,  on  this  account,  rejoice  in  hope 
(Rom.  xii.  12;   1  Thess.  v.  16;  Rom.  v.  2). 

3.  Vers.  22,  23.  Sermon  on  a  special  day  of 
fasting  and  prayer  by  the  court-preacher  Grue- 
NEisEN,  in  Palmer's  ev.  Casual-Reden,  Bd.  1., 
S.  '111.  "Our  text  instructs  us,  1.  How  God, 
even  in  times  of  affliction,  shows  His  regard  for 
us.  2.  How  we  also,  in  such  affliction,  should 
show  our  regard  for  God." 

4.  Vers.  22,  23.  "  With  what  we  may  comfort 
ourselves  when  we  feel  that  we  are  forsaken.  1. 
The  goodness  of  the  Lord,  that  helps  to  sustain 
us,  so  that  we  are  not  utterly  overwhelmed.  2. 
The  compassion  of  the  Lord,  which  we  experi- 
ence every  day.  3.  The  faithfulness  of  the  Lord, 
which  enables  us  to  hope  firmly  in  the  fulfilment 
of  all  His  promises."  Florey,  bill.  Wegiveiser 
fiir  geistliche  Grabreden,  Nr.  46. 

6.  Vers.  24,  25.  "  The  happiness  of  a  believing 
soul  even  in  painful  circumstances.  1.  The  conso- 
lation which  it  takes  to  itself, — God  is  my  portion. 

2.  The  resolution  to  which  it  is  stimulated, — 1 
will  hope  in  Ilim.  3.  The  experience  it  makea 
proof  of, — the  Lord  is  gracious."  Florey,  ib. 
Nr.  47. 

6.  Vers.  26,  27.  "  The  benefits  of  early  affliction. 
1.  They  teach  at  a  time  when  men  are  most  sus- 
ceptible of  instruction  ;  and  they  teach  them 
[what  they  most  need  to  learn  at  that  time  of 
life]  to  recognize  the  vanity  of  earthly  things 
and  to  give  lieed  to  the  Word  of  God.  2.  They 
purify  at  a  time  when  the  heart  is  in  the  greatesc 
danger  of  being  corrupted ;  and  they  purify 
them  from  [those  besetting  sins  of  youth]  self- 
ishness and  sensuality.  3.  They  strengthen  them 
at  a  time  when  strength  is  weakest  and  tempta- 
tions to  sin  are  the  strongest;  and  they  strengthen 
them  especially  to  patient  endurance  on  this 
earth  and  separation  from  this  earth."  Floret, 
ib.  Nr.  48.  See  Trost  und  Mahnung  an  Grdbern, 
a.  Bdndch.,  S.  154. 

7.  Vers.  27-33.  The  chastisements  of  the  Lord. 
1.  He  chastises  not  for  the  sake  of  making  men 
miserable  (ver.  33).  2.  He  chastises  not  for- 
ever (vers.  31,  32).  3.  He  chastises  that  we  may 
learn,  (1)  patience  (vers.  27,  28),  (2)  silence, 
quietness  (ver.  29),  (3)  meekness  (ver.  30),  (4) 
hope  (ver.  29). 

8.  Vers.  27-33.  The  Divine  discipline.  1.  Its 
source;  Love  (vers.  31-33).     2.  Its  means;  Sor- 


CHAP.  III. 


147 


row  and  joy  (vers.  27-33).  3.  Its  aim  ;  the  per- 
fecting of  the  man  of  God  (vers.  27-30,  see  2 
Tim.  iii.  17). 

9.  Vers.  31-33.  *^  The  blessed  change  with  which 
believing  Christians  may  console  themselves.  1.  After 
pain  follows  pleasure.  2.  After  death,  life. 
3.  After  separation,  a  restoration."  Floret,  as 
above,  Nr.  49. 

10.  Ver.  32.  ^'■The  history  of  the  year's  harvest  an 
iviag"  of  our  history  for  the  year.  The  resemblance 
appears  in  these  respects :  1.  How  finely  the 
whole  country  looked;  2.  With  what  difficulty 
it  withstood  the  power  of  the  storm;  3.  How, 
nevertheless,  God's  hand  has  protected  us." 
Bryek,  S.  E.  (in  Plauen),  Harvest  Sermon,  1866. 

11.  Vers.  37,  38.  '' N'o  misfortune  happens  with- 
out  God's  will.  1.  This  is  a  great  comfort  to 
those  on  whom  misfortune  has  fallen  ;  for  (1), 
they  will  not  vex  themselves  unnecessarily  with 
self-inflicted  reproaches  ;  (2),  they  will  be  more 
susceptible  to  the  voice  of  the  Gospel;  (3),  they 
will  humble  themselves  under  the  mighty  hand 
of  God.  2.  This  is  a  strong  support  for  the 
confidence  in  God  of  those  who  properly  consider 
it ;  for  (I),  they  will  be  freer  from  anxious  cares ; 
(2),  stronger  in  their  reliance  on  God's  guidance ; 
(3),  they  will  be  more  perfect  in  the  spiritual 
man.  3.  This  is  a  solemn  warning  to  those  who 
embrace  this  opinion  ;  (1),  that  they  do  not  sin 
against  the  wisdom  of  God  ;  (2),  that  they  do 
not  violate  brotherly  love  ;  (3),  that  they  do  not 
forestall  the  judgment  of  God's  word."  Florey, 
same  as  above,  iVr.  251.  See  Trost  und  Mahnung 
an  Grabern,  i.  Bdchen.  s.  216. 

12.  Vers.  18-39.  Sermon  of  G.  Chr.  Deichert 
on  Midlent  Sunday  (see  Stern  aus  Jakob,  Stutlg., 
Liesching,  1867:  "This  Lenten  Sunday  brings 
us  into  sorrow's  school,  where  we  shall  learn 
liope  in  God,  under  severe  chastisement  and  in 
bitter  trouble;  where  we  shall  learn  submissive 
meekness,  and  yet  have  hours  of  respite,  when 
we  may  take  breath,  gather  fresh  strength,  and 
address  ourselves  anew  to  the  conflict.  But  the 
first  thing  is  that  we  pass  the  examination  [or 
trial  for  entrance  into  this  school]." 

13.  Vers.  39-42.  "Weighty  words  for  every 
one  who  is  under  the  cross  and  in  trouble. 
This,  then,  is  no  time  for  unbelieving,  impatient, 
impenitent  murmuring,  but  a  time  when  we 
should  examine  ourselves,  and  learn  in  what  re- 
spects we  deserve  what  the  Lord  says  to  us,  by 
means  of  such  chastisements,  and  when  we  should 
submit  patiently  to  His  will,  who  smites  us 
righteously,  and  thus  implore  grace."  Calwer 
Handbuch  Bibelerkldrung. — "If  God  chastises  the 
sinner,  but  with  measure,  so  that  He  still  spares 
hia    life,   then  should   not  man,   whose   life    is 


spared  by  the  grace  of  God,  lament  on  account 
of  God's  righteousness,  and  on  account  of  the 
punishment  of  his  own  sins;  rather  every  one 
should  lament  on  account  of  his  own  sin,  which 
has  brought  that  punishment  upon  him  ;  every 
one  should  complain  of  himself  (not  of  God),  for 
this  is  an  indication  of  true  penitence."  Lisco. 

14.  Vers.  39-42.  The  murmuring  that  is  forbid- 
den and  that  which  is  commanded.  1.  Forbidden, 
because  unjustifiable,  is  murmuring  over  the  evil 
we  are  obliged  to  suffer  as  a  punishment  of  our 
sins  (vers.  39,  42).  2.  Commanded,  is  murmur- 
ing over  our  sins,  by  which  we  have  offended 
God ;  and  this  is  right  only  when  it  results 
(1),  in  sincere  repentance  (ver.  40)  ;  (2),  in 
hearty  prayer  for  God's  grace. 

15.  Vers.  44-50.  Of  wrestling  with  Godinprayer. 
1.  This  presupposes  an  attack  that  God  has  made 
upon  us,  through  the  cross  and  trouble  (vers.  45- 
47,  comp.  vers.  1-17).  2.  It  consists  (1),  on  our 
part,  in  vehement  prayer  (vers.  48,  49) ;  (2),  on 
God's  part,  in  the  repeated  rejection  of  our 
prayer  (ver.  44.)  3.  It  ends  (1),  on  our  part, 
with  believing  perseverance  in  prayer;  (2),  on 
God's  part,  with  God-like  acceptance  of  our 
prayers  (ver.  50). 

16.  Vers.  48-66.  Prayer  of  the  innocent  and  perse- 
cuted man  for  help  against  his  enemies.  1.  Descrip- 
tion of  the  wanton  oppression  of  his  enemies  and 
the  heart-felt  lamentation  of  the  oppressed  (vers. 
48-54).  2.  Whither  this  one  had  turned  himself 
[for  help]  in  this  difficulty.  (Vers.  55-58;  "We, 
who  had  been  cast,  as  it  were,  into  the  pit  of 
destruction  and  the  abyss  of  terror  and  distress, 
knew  not  whither  to  betake  ourselves,  except 
unto  Thee  alone,  0  Lord  !  We  called  upon  Thee 
out  of  our  anguished  hearts,  and  Thou  didst 
hear  us.  Since  Thou  hast  begun  to  hear,  hide 
not  now  Thine  ears  from  our  sighs  and  our 
cries.")  3.  Prayer,  that  God  will  not  let  the 
wickedness  of  his  enemies  go  unrevenged.  (Vers. 
59-66:  "With  Thee,  truly,  0  Lord,  I  have  no- 
thing to  say,  because  one  cannot  answer  Thee 
for  one  thing  of  a  thousand.  But  this  we  com- 
mend to  Thee,  0  Lord,  as  the  Righteous  Judge, 
that  our  enemies,  without  any  justifying  cause, 
have  tyrannized  over  us  so  grievously.  Thou 
hearest  also  their  reproach,  which  is  uttered  not 
only  against  us,  but  much  more  against  Thy  holy 
name.  Because  they  will  not  cease  from  this 
outrageous  insolence,  do  Thou  then  set  about  to 
requite  them,  as  they  have  deserved.  Let  their 
heai't  be  terrified,  that  is  now  defiant ;  let  them 
feel  Thy  curse,  which  now  they  despise'").  Fifth 
Sermon  of  Eqid.  Humnius  on  the  3d  chap,  of 
Lamentations. 


148  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Chapter  IV. 

ZiON'S    QVlhX    AND    PUNISHMENT    GEAPHICALLT    DESCRIBED    BY    AN    ETE-WITNESS,    [OR    THE    SUFFEB- 
INGS    OP    THE    PEOPLE    OF    ALL    GRADES    AND    RANKS    OF    SOCIETY. W.  H.  H.] 

The  Song  consists  plainly  of  four  parts  [or  sections],  vers.  1-6 ;  7-11 ;  12-16 ;  17-20 ;  and  a  conclusion,  yera.  21,  32. 

PART  I.  Vers.  1-11. 

Sect.  I.  Vers.  1-6. 

{<  Vbr.  1.  How  doth  gold  become  dim ! 

The  choice  gold  change  its  color  I 
The  hallowed  stones  are  cast  forth 
At  the  head  of  every  street. 
'2  Ver.  2.  The  noble  sons  of  Zion, 

Who  are  equal  in  value  to  the  purest  gold, 
How  are  they  esteemed  as  earthen  pitchers, 
The  work  of  the  hands  of  the  Potter ! 

J  Ver.  3.    Even  jackals  drew  out  the  breasts, 
They  suckled  their  whelps. 
The  daughter  of  my  people  became  cruel, 
Like  ostriches  in  the  wilderness. 
1  Ver.  4.  The  tongue  of  the  sucking  babe  cleaved 
To  the  roof  of  his  mouth  for  thirst : 
Young  children  asked  bread. 

There  was  no  one  to  break  to  them. 
n  Ver.  5.  They  that  fed  on  dainties 
Perished  on  the  streets  : 
They  that  were  borne  on  scarlet 
Embraced  heaps-of-dirt. 

)  Ver.  6.   For  greater  was  the  iniquity  of  the  daughter  of  my  people 
Than  the  sin  of  Sodom, 
Which  was  overthrown  as  in  a  moment 
And  no  hands  came  against  her. 

Sec.  II.  Vers.  7-11. 

r    Ver.  7.   Her  princes  were  purer  than  snow, 
Whiter  than  milk, 
They  were  more  ruddy  in  body  than  corals; 
Their  form — a  sapphire. 
n  Ver.  8.  Their  visage  became  darker  than  blackness: 
They  were  not  known  in  the  streets : 
Their  skin  cleaved  to  their  bones, 
It  became  dry  like  a  stick. 
0  Ver.  9.  Happier  were  those  slain  by  the  sword 
Than  these  slain  by  famine. 
Those  pierced-ones,  whose  lives  gushed  forth 
While  yet  there  were  fruits  of  the  field. 
*  Ver.  10.  The  hands  of  tender-hearted  women 
Cooked  their  own  children  ; 
They  became  food  for  th'^ni 

In  the  ruin  of  the  daughter  of  my  people. 


CHAP.  IV.   1,  2.  149 

D  Ver.  11.  Jehovah  fulfilled  His  fury ; 

He  poured  out  His  fierce  wrath. 
And  He  kindled  a  fire  in  Zion, 

And  it  consumed  her  foundations. 

ANALYSIS. 

[7%e  first  elegy  related  especially  to  the  city  of  Jerusalem;  the  second,  to  Zion  and  the  holy  places;  th» 
third,  to  the  sufferings  of  the  prophet,  as  a  representative  of  the  spiritual  Israel;  this  fourth  elegy, 
'•Hates  to  the  sufferings  of  the  people  generally,  embracing  all  classes. — W.  H.  H.] 

The  two  parts,  comprising  the  frst-half  of  the  chapter,  vers.  1 — 6,  7 — 11,  correspond  with  each  other,  both 
in  matter  and  form.  In  the  first  part,  vers.  1 — 6,  is  described  the  sad  fate  of  the  sons  of  Zion,  noble 
scions  of  the  noblest  lineage  (Jer.  ii.  21).  A  contrast  is  presented,  not  only  between  their  great  worth 
and  their  pitiable  fortune,  but  also  between  the  fate  that  befell  them,  who  constituted  the  living  treasure 
of  Zion,  and  the  fate  of  its  material  wealth,  vers.  1,  2.  Then  is  described  the  harrowing  grief,  caused 
by  the  sufferings  of  little  children,  which  could  not  possibly  be  relieved,  vers.  3 — 5.  Finally  this  part 
closes  with  the  general  remark,  that  Zion's  guilt,  if  inferred  from  these  facts,  had  been  even  greater 
than  Sodom's,  ver.  6. 

In  the  second  part,  vers.  7 — 11,  the  Poet  first  describes  the  noble  appearance  and  character  of  the  Princes 
of  Judah,  and  then,  in  striking  contrast,  the  frightful  wrongs  they  had  endured,  vers.  7 — 9;  a  descrip- 
tion which  evidently  constitutes  a  parallel  to  that  contained  in  vers.  1,  2.  So,  also,  parallel  to  ivhat 
was  said  of  the  children  in  vers.  3 — 5,  is  what  ice  read  on  the  same  subject  in  ver.  10;  only  what 
is  here  said  in  ver.  10,  constitutes  a  climax  to  what  was  related  in  vers.  3 — 5.  The  second  part,  like 
the  first,  ends  with  a  general  remark;  Zion  has  suffered  the  full  measure  of  Divine  wrath,  ver.  11. 

IV.  1,  2. 

1  How  is  the  gold  become  dim !  how  is  the  most  fine  gold  changed !  the  stones  of 

2  the  sanctuary  are  poured  out  in  the  top  of  every  street.  The  precious  sons  of  Zion, 
comparable  to  fine  gold,  how  are  they  esteemed  as  earthen  pitchers,  the  work  of  the 
hands  of  the  potter ! 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  1.  nD'5<,  see  i.  1. — □  VV,  Hophal  only  here ;  elsewhere  only  Kal  occurs,  and  that  only  twice,  Ez.  xxviii.  3 ;  xxxi.  8. 
If  the  signification  of  DOJ^,  demanded  by  the  context  in  Ez.  xxviii.  3,  is  latere, — and  in  xxxi.  8,  is  obscurare,  then  it  natu- 

~   T 

rally  follows  that  the  signification  of  the  Hophal  here  is  obscurari;  though  it  is  not  yet  clearly  apparent  how  this  meaning 
agrees  with  the  idea  of  accumulation  (Sammelns),  which  lies  in  the  words  Q^  TVZ^  DJ7-  [Henderson  ;  "DOJ,'  to  congregaU, 
Arabic,  texit,  obstruxit,  as  clouds,  when  collected,  do  the  heavens ;  hence  to  grow,  or  make  dark,  obscure  the  lustre  of  any- 
thing. LXX  €|naupuj0T)."]— NJE^'-  With  respect  to  its  Aramaic  form,  see  iii.  12  ;  2  Kings  xxv.  29  ;  Eccl.  viii.  11.  [Blatnet  : 
"Twenty-five  MSS.  and  one  edition  read  nJty'."]  The  word  has  the  signification  of  ahum,  diversum  esse. — mutari, — only 
in  later  Hebrew,  Esth.  i.  7  ;  iii.  8  ;  Mai.  iii.  6  ;  and  that  in  accordance  with  the  Chaldaic,  which  often  uses  XJi^  in  this  sense, 

T  T 

Dan.  iii.  27  ;  v.  9  ;  vi.  18.— □i13,  is  not  found  in  Jer. ;  it  stands  in  parallelism  with  2T^'t  in  Job  xxxi.  24 ;  Prov.  xxv.  12 ;  it 
is  used  with  Jt),  Cant.  v.  11.  [The  Sept.  have  apyvpcov,  not  because  they  read  HD  JD,  I'Ut  because  they  were  unwilling  to 
repeat  the  word  gold.  Rosenmueller.] 

Ver.  2.  D''"1p'-    In  Jer.  only  in  xv.  19.— xSd  only  here.    The  expression  seems  to  be  taken  from  Job  xxviii.  16, 19, 
•  I:  •  T  T 

where  we  read  of  wisdom  Dn33  nboH  xb.  H^D  (xSd)  is  tollere,  pendere.    [Jerome  translates  amicM  auro,  which  Cal- 

•.■  ■.:•.•■■:  T  T         T  T 

TIN  prefers.    "The  value,  and  not  the  appearance  is  evidently  meant,"  (Owen)  ;  it  is  the  explanation  of  D'Tp%  precious.— 

W.  H.  H.]— 13  from  US,  secernere,  purgare,  does  not  occur  in  Jer. ;  yet  see  x.  9.  The  article  generalizes  the  meaning.— 
Jer.  never  uses  the  Niphal  3l?n3-— "731  Jer.  xiii.  12;  xlviii.  l2.—J:;-\r[,  Jer.  xix.  1 ;  xxxii.  14.  The  construction  with  S, 
as  Is.  xxix.  17  ;  Ps.  cvi.  31.  Elsewhere,  after  2Vr\}  that  with  which  the  comparison  is  made  is  indicated  by  3,  DJ^,  or 
the  simple  nominative.— "IVV,  frequent  in  Jer.  x.  16;  xviii.  2,3,4;  xix.  1,11;  etc.  [No  occasional  use  of  a  new  word 
can  invalidate  the  presumption  created  by  the  use  of  the  image  of  a  potter's  vessel,  that  Jeremiah  was  the  author  of  this 
poem.— W.U.H.]— The  expression '•''  <•"'  ntJ'j^O,  occurs  here  only. 


EXEGETICAL    AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  1.  How.  That  this  soug  also  begins  with 
this  exclamation  (n3\N)  is  a  strong  argument 
for  the  identity  of  the  author.  It  is  in  the 
highest  degree  improbable  that  different  authors 
not  only  composed  alphabetical  songs  on  the 
same  subject,  but  also  began  tlieni  with  the  veiy 


how  is  the  most  fine  gold  changed !  IIow 
may  gold  become  black,  the  precious  treasure  change 
its  color?  The  correct  understanding  of  this 
verse  depends  on  the  understanding  of  the  next 
verse  and  its  relation  to  this  verse.  Thenius 
would  substitute  in  ver.  2,  houses  of  Zion  for  sons 
of  Zion  ('^3  instead  of  ""JS).  Without  dwelling 
on  the  fact,  that  not  the  least  critical  evidence 
for  such  a  change  of  the  text  is  offered,  the  con- 


same  word.     How  is  the  gold  become  dim!  I  text  afforls  sufficient  evidence   against  it:    for 


150 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


not.  only  would  houses  equal  in  value  to  gold  be  an 
exaggerated  hyperbole,  but  it  is  evident  from  the 
antithesis  involved  in  the  expression  the  loork  of 
the  hands  of  the  potter,  and  also  from  the  subject 
of  the  parallel  verses  7-9,  that  men  are  intended. 
But  if  we  retain  the  reading  sons  of  Zion,  and  if 
the  meaning  is  that  the  sons  of  Zion.  regarded 
&i precious,  are  equal  in  value  [^comparablel  to  gold, 
then  it  is  obvious  in  what  sense  gold  and  precious 
stones  are  spoken  of  in  ver.  1.  It  is  not  of  the 
fate  of  the  Temple-gold  and  Temple-walls  that  he 
speaks  [Calvin,  Boothroyd,  Notes,  and  seem- 
ingly Wordsworth]  ;  but  the  Poet  asks  how  is 
it  possible  that  noble  gold  should  lose  its  bright- 
ness, that  the  precious  stones  should  be  thrown 
upon  the  street?  Thus,  says  he,  has  it  happened  to 
the  sons  of  Zion,  who  are  such  jewels.  And  thus, 
what  never  happened  in  the  case  of  material  trea- 
sures and  jewels,  has  occurred  in  the  case  of 
these  living,  metaphorical  jewels.  We  take,  then, 
ver.  1,  as  a  question,  relating  to  what  was  likely 
to  happen  according  to  the  usual  course  of  things. 
This  is  involved  in  the  use  of  the  imperfect  tense 
in  the  Hebrew  verbs  [0^^',  etc  ),  which  refer  to 
matters  not  yet  completed  as,  it  was  becoming  dim 
or  obscured,  etc.  In  any  other  sense  the  perfect 
tense  would  have  been  necessary.  Nor  can  these 
imperfects  be  referred  to  the  work  of  destruc- 
tion while  in  course  of  execution  (Thenius);  for 
it  would  certainly  be  very  singular  to  represent 
the  Jews  as  saying,  whilst  the  work  of  destruc- 
tion was  going  on,  "How  is  now  the  gold  in  the 
Temple  blackened  by  the  smoke  !  How  now  are 
the  stones  of  the  Temple-wall  rolled  down!" 
Those,  over  whose  heads  everything  was  going 
to  pieces,  could  not  be  thinking  of  such  miuute 
and  particular  details  as  these.  Rather,  in  the 
form  of  a  question,  what  had  never  before  been 
known  to  happen,  is  here  afiirmed.  [The  form 
is  interrogative,  only  so  far  as  the  interjection 
of  surprise  suggests  a  question  as  to  the  possi- 
bility of  an  event,  else  unparalleled.  The  construc- 
tion is  the  same  as  in  i.  1,  How  sitteth  solitary  the 
city  that,  etc. !  So  here,  How  doth  gold  become  dim  ! 
That  the  reference  is  to  men,  and  not  to  literal 
gold  and  jewels,  is  the  opinion  of  Blatney,  Hen- 
derson, RosENMUELLER,  Gerlach  and  others. 
Gerlach:  "Since  the  chapter  contains  not  one 
word  (unless  here)  of  the  destruction  and  rob- 
bery of  the  Temple  and  palaces,  but  describes 
especially  what  befell  the  men,  rather  than  the 
edifices  of  the  city,  (which  latter  theme  had  al- 
ready been  exhaustively  discussed  in  chap,  ii.), 
therefore  the  first  verse  must  not  be  taken  liter- 
ally and  explained  of  the  Temple  and  its  orna- 
ments (Ghald.,  Maurer,  Kalkar,  Thenius;  see 
i.  10).  It  is  rather  to  be  taken  figuratively, 
either  generally  of  the  fall  of  all  that  was  high 
and  valuable  in  Israel,  of  which  particular  in- 
stances are  cited  in  what  follows,  or,  as  Michae- 
Lis  and  RosENMUELLER  have  preferred,  specifi- 
cally, as  explained  by  the  following  verse,  which 
interprets  the  ^oZc?  and  holy  stones  of  ver.  1,  by 
the  sons  of  Zion,  whilst  the  words  are  throw7i  down 
at  all  the  street- corners,  find  their  explanation  in 
the  more  detailed  description  of  ver.  5.  Besides, 
this  designatiou    of  the  sons  of  Zion  as  stones  of 

holiness  (iyip~'J3S<  i,  has  an  analogy  in  the  stones 
of  a  crown  ^p}l~'}2'A,  precious  stones)   in  Zeeh.  ix. 


16.  From  this  it  appears,  how  unauthorized  is 
the  presumption  (Michaelis,  Rosenmueller), 
which  would  perceive  in  the  expression,  stones  of 
holiness,  a  reference  to  the  stones  on  the  breast- 
plate of  the  High  Priest  and,  therefore,  a  desig- 
nation of  the  Priests  (whilst  the  gold  denotes  the 
people  generally,  and  the  precious  ore  [^fne  gold'] 
the  Princes),  or  would  understand  the  words 
stones  of  holiness  as  referring  directly  to  the  stones 
on  the  breast-plate  of  the  High  Priest  (Maurer 
[Notes],  see  Bellermann,  Urim  u.  Thum  ,  5'.  21. 
'With  the  Israelites,  thrown  about  dead  on  tlie 
streets,  on  account  of  their  sins, — the  holy  stones 
— regarded  as  symbols  of  the  people — will,  at  the 
same  time,  be  scattered  about  at  the  corners  of 
the  streets.')  The  literal  interpretation  of  the 
stones  as  the  stones  of  the  walls  of  the  Sanctuary, 
by  Thenius  and  Neumann.  [Calvin,  Booth- 
ROTD,  etc.],  (in  which  case  the  words  should  be 

2/"lpn~''J!3X),  is  controverted  by  the  improbability 
of  their  being  scattered  about  through  all  the 
streets  of  the  city, — an  opinion,  which  is  not 
made  more  acceptable  by  the  conjecture  of  The- 
nius, that  all  the  streets  of  the  city  terminated 
near  the  Temple  in  an  open  square,  for  in  any 
case  the  expression  would  then  be  very  strongly 
hyperbolical." — W.  H.  H.] — Become  dim. — 
The  signification  of  the  verb  (0^^^%  obscurari).  is 
to  be  taken,  not  in  the  sense  of  a  momentary 
effect,  but  of  a  continuous  obscuration.  For  not 
a  superficial  and  transient,  but  a  deep  and  abid- 
ing depravation  is  affirmed  in  ver.  2,  of  the  gold- 
like sons  of  Zion.  What  is  said,  then,  is  this, 
How  can  gold  lose  its  bright  lustre,  and  become 
dull,  tarnished,  black? — [How.  The  repetition 
of  the  how  in  the  English  version  is  as  unneces- 
sary here  as  in  i.  1. — The  most  fine  gold. — 
The  Hebrew  word  for  gold  here  is  not  the  same 
Hebrew  word  used  in  the  preceding  clause. 
Broughton  has  supplied  the  lack  of  an  English 
equivalent  by  retaining  the  Hebrew  word:  ffow 
is  the  gold  dimmed !  how  is  the  pure  cethern  changed! 
The  Hebrew  word  (Or*^)  has  been  vai-iously  de- 
rived and  interpreted.  Three  explanations 
have  received  the  sanction  of  high  authority  (see 
Lange's  Comm.,  Cant.  v.  11).  It  has  been  de- 
rived from  DflD,  to  hide,  to  hoard,  hence  esteemed 
precious.  So  Barnes,  Job  xxxi.  24.  Dr.  Nae- 
gelsbach  seems  to  adopt  this  sense.  The  English 
version  also  by  using  the  superlative  most  tine 
gold.  But  if  the  word  itself  nrnant  precious  go/d, 
the  addition  of  the  adjective  31D,  good,  would  be 
superfluous.  It  has  been  derived,  again,  from 
Dn3  in  the  supposed  sense  of  being  solid,  dense, 
hence  massive  gold:  so  Blatney,  the  best  massy 
gold.  Others  derive  it  from  Dn3=Dt^n,  to  shine, 
to  glitter,  and  explain  it  of  some  very  valuable 
kind  of  metal  like  gold  (so  Gerlach  the  eo.s7/?/  ore, 
or  metal,  Erz)  ;  or  of  a  particular  kind  of  gold  that 
shines  and  sparkles,  genus  auri  fulgentis,  a  micando 
(Fuerst's  Concordance).  This  last  meaning  seems 
to  agree  best  with  the  sense  here,  the  use  of  the 
word  in  Cant.  v.  11,  and  the  very  peculiar  use  of 
the  verb  in  Jer.  ii.  22.  According  to  Rosen- 
MUELLER,  Chaldeaus  rendered  it  V\,splendor,  the 
Syriac  and  Jerome,  color. — Changed,  faded  or 
changed  its  color.  Gerlach:  "  This  can  only  de- 
note a  change  of  color,  or  loss  of  brightness,  since 


CHAP.  IV.  3-5. 


iiil 


the  gold  could  not  be  cliauged  in  its  substance." 
W.  H.  H.] — The  stones  of  the  Sanctuary- 
are  poured  out  in  the  top  of  every  street. 

Thrown  down  are  the  stones  of  the  sanctuari/  ^.■itones 
of  holiness,  or  consecrated  stones^  at  the  corners  of 
all  the  streets.  The  expression  stones  of  the  sanctu- 
ary (K^'lp  'J3K),  is  found  only  here.  By  itself  it 
might  properly  denote  the  stones  of  the  Temple 
walls,  particularly  since  these  are  also  called 
costly  stones  (r»'l"ljT  D\J3X),  1  Kings  t.  31  (17); 
vii.  9-11.  But  who  would  take  the  trouble  to 
carry  these  away  and  pour  them  out  in  the  cor- 
ners of  the  streets?  What  Thenius  says  of  the 
concentration  of  the  principal  streets  at  the  foot 
of  the  Temple  hill,  is  very  problematical.  Be- 
sides, the  connection  requires  the  sense  of  pre- 
cious stones:  for  with  such,  not  with  wall-stones, 
however  excellent,  are  the  Sons  of  Zion  com- 
pared as  precious  (D'Tp'),  and  precious  stones 
(iT^p'  pX),  are  often  named,  as  here,  in  connec- 
tion with  "gold,  2  Sam.  xii.  30;  1  Kings  x.  2,  10, 
11.  In  regard  to  the  use  of  precious  stones  in 
the  Sanctuary,  they  were  not  only  attached  to 
the  garments  of  the  High  Priest  (Ex.  xxviii.  9,  17- 
20;  xxxix.  6,  10-13),  but  they  were  employed 
for  ornamenting  the  Temple  itself  (2  Chron.  iii. 
6;  1  Chron.  xxix.  2).  Who  would  pour  out  such 
valuable  stones  in  the  corners  of  all  the  streets,  that 
is  to  say,  in  the  first  corner  one  happened  to 
come  to?  Even  the  enemy  did  not  do  that.  Yet 
this  thing  happened  to  the  sons  of  Zion  though 
they  were  most  precious  jewels. 

Ver.  2.  The  precious  sons  of  Zion, — Zion's 
sons,  the  noble  ones  (D''"^p"n,  comp.  m"lp\  honorable 
women,  Ps.  xlv.  10  (9)  ).  That  we  are  to  under- 
stand here  by  the  sons  of  Zion,  the  nobility  of  the 
people  [Calvin,  Henderson],  I  do  not  believe. 
The  expression.is  too  comprehensive,  and  nothing 
prevents  our  understanding  the  following  pre- 
dicates   of  the    chosen  people    generally,*  who 

*  [Gerlach  would  narrow  the  meaning  down  to  the  littie 
thUaren  referred  to  vers.  3,  4,  and  explains  their  being  called 


were  in  their  totality  a  kingdom  of  priests  (Ex. 
xix.  6).  The  Princes  are  spoken  of  for  the  first 
time  in  the  second  part,  vers.  7-11,  which  con- 
stitutes throughout  the  climax  of  the  first  part. 
— Comparable  to  fine  gold,  who  are  equal  in 
value  to  gold  [lit.,  tliose  who  are  weighed  with  pure 
gold.  Henderson:  "As  what  is  weighed  is  es- 
timated according  to  the  contents  of  the  opposite 
scale,  the  verb  came  to  be  employed  in  the  sense 
of  comparing  one  thing  with  another.  Comp. 
Job  xxviii.  16,  19.'] — Pine  gold,  T3,  is  pure, 
solid  gold.  [This  is  still  another  Hebrew  word 
for  gold,  indicating  its  quality.  Broughton 
anglicizes  it,  Fest,e  ore,  as  he  does  Dj13  in  ver.  1, 
which  he  calls  cethern.  Blaynet  :  the  purest  gold. 
— W.  H.  H.]  They  are  estimated  by  the  gold,  that 
is  to  say,  their  value  is  represented  by  a  mass  of 
gold,  the  weight  of  which  is  equal  to  their  own. 
The  expression  is  figurative. — How.  [The  repe- 
tition of  this  word   HD'X,  is  forcible.     It   serves 

T 

to  connect  this  verse  with  ver.  1,  anxl  to  continue 
and  complete  the  sentence  begun  with  the  same 
word  in  ver.  1.  It  shows  that  one  idea  of  horror 
and  amazement  pervades  the  whole  sentence,  and 
hence  that  the  ^oW,c/;o(ce^oW,  and  hallowed  stones, 
of  ver.  1,  are  identical  with  the  precious  sons  of 
Zion,  in  ver.  2. — W.  H.  H.]. — Are  they  es- 
teemed as  earthen  pitcheis^potsherd-pitchc7-s 
— the  ■work  of  the  hands  of  the  potter! 
[Wordsworth:  "As  Jeremiah  himself  had  repre- 
sented them  to  be  shattered  in  pieces  for  their 
sins,  xix.  10.  11."  Gataker:  "As  bottles  of 
sherd,  or  earthen  stuff,  soJer.  xix.  1,  10;  as  things 
of  no  repute  or  worth,  2  Cor.  iv.  7.  See  Jer. 
xxii.  28."  Geklach:  "The  point  of  comparison 
is  the  worthlessness  of  the  material  out  of  which 
they  are  made,  see  Is.  xlv.  9."] 

precious,  comparable  to  gold,  by  passages  in  which  children 
are  represented  as  of  more  value  than  any  other  gift  of  God, 
Gen.  XV.  2  ;  x.\x.  1 ;  Ps.  cxxvii.  3.  There  is  no  necessity  for 
this.  It  is  much  more  natural  to  take  these  two  introduc- 
tory verses  as  embracing  a  general  description  of  the  humilia- 
tion of  the  whole  people.  The  verse*  that  follow  give  us  the 
details  of  the  picture,  with  reference  to  particular  classes  of 
people.— W.  H.  H.] 


IV.  8-5. 

3  Even  the  sea-monsters  draw  out  tlie  breast,  they  give  suck  to  their  young  ones  : 

4  the  daughter  of  my  people  is  become  cruel,  like  the  ostriches  in  the  wilderness.  The 
tongue  of  the  sucking  child  cleaveth  to  the  roof  of  his  mouth  for  thirst ;  the  young 

6  children  ask  bread,  and  no  man  breaketh  it  unto  them.  They  that  did  feed  deli- 
cately are  desolate  in  the  streets ;  they  that  were  brought  up  in  scarlet  embrace 
dung-hills. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  3. — \V-^r\  (K'ri,  D'^jl).  Sea-monsters,  E.  V.,  Boothroyd  :  sea-calves,  E.  V.  marg. :  dragons,  Beoughton,  Blatnet, 
OWBN ;  serpent,  Calvin  ;  jackals,  Henderson,  Notes,  Fuerst,  Lex. :  wolves,  Oerlach  :  wild-dogs,  Thenius.] — V /PI,  never 
used  in  Jeremiah,  is  used  of  pulling  off  the  shoe,  in  Deut.  xxv.  9,  10 ;  Is.  xx.  2.  The  sense  of  drawing,  seems  to  lie  at  the 
foundation  of  this  root  (see  Hos.  v.  6).  Whether  a  second  root  V  Sn  (from  which  comes  Vl/D,  <"*«  equipped,  a  warrior} 
may  be  affirmed,  or  whether  the  original  identity  of  both  may  be  established,  we  cannot  now  stop  to  inquire. — ^I^,  mamma, 
Jeromiah  never  uses  [because  he  never  had  occasion  to  speak  of  the  female  breasts  or  teats. — W.  II.  U.] — Of  the  verb  p3'> 
.Icn-miah  uses  only  once  the  Particij)le  pj V,  xliv.  7,  in  a  substantive  sense.  [The  only  tiiiif  Jeroniiali  in  his  prophecies  h.»d 
occasion  ti  speak  of  a.  suckling,  or  make  any  allusion  to  a  mother's  uursiuj;  a  child  at  the  brea^.,  he  uses  the  participie  of 


152 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


theTerbpJV  What  verb  then  would  Jeremiah  have  been  more  likely  to  use  in  this  place  ?—W.  H.  H.J—n-U.  younjr-one 
[whelp],  is  found  once  in  Jeremiah,  in  the  form  nij.  li-38,  see  Nah.  ii.  13.— '^^'-,13.     See  ii.  11 ;  iii.  48.— 1I3X7-     The 

verb  to  be  or  become  must  be  supplied.    See  Ewald,  g  217  d,  a.    TOX  (Jeremiah  uses  only  "'IT^X,  ^i-  23 ;  xxx.  14 ;  1.  42)  is 

T  :  -  -Ti- 

the cruel  ont.  Job  xxx.  21.  We  would  expect  the  feminine  form :  but  that  is  never  used,  and,  besides,  the  masculine  form 
seems  intended  to  convey  the  idea  of  unwomunly,  unmotherly ;  it  is  as  if  it  were  said,  Zion  has  become  a  hardened  man. — 
D'jy  ^2-  The  Masorites  connect  the  two  words  and  read  D''JJ7"'3-  It  is  true  that  'l^''  occurs  only  here  (elsewhere  the 
ostrich  is  called  H  Ji^'-HS,  the  daughter  of  screeching,  Mic.  i.  8 ;  Job.  xxx.  29,  etc.).  Yet  the  K'ri  is  to  be  approved  of.  For, 
on  the  one  hand,  the  separation  could  easily  happen  by  mistalto ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  D'JJ^)  as  the  K'tib  has  it,  gives 
no  satisfactory  sense.  It  must  be  translated.  For  criers  (Heuler)  in  the  wilderness  (are  they.)  To  supply  71311  here  is  dif- 
ficult, and  who  are  the  criers  in  the  wilderness?  The  children,  or  (as  others  prefer)  their  parents?  [Forty-live  of  Kenni- 
cott's  JISS.,  and  seventy-seven  of  De  Rossi's,  and  most  of  the  early  printed  editions  of  the  15th  century,  according  to  Hen- 
derson and  Gerlach,  have  D' JJ?''3>  without  any  reference  to  another  reading,     "  Neumann,  in  support  ul'  the  Utib,  would 

understand  by  the  crying  ones  (Ileulenden)  the  ivild  beasts  of  the  wilderness,  as  the  Venetian  Greek,  cus  o-eip^ves  "  (Gerlach). 
— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  4. — f)2,)  p^T.    The  same  phrase  is  found  in  Job  xxix.  10;  Ps.  cxxxvii.  6;  comp.  xxii.  10  (15);  Ez.  iii.  26,  where 

Sx  is  used. — Jeremiah  uses  ^n  never  [because  he  never  had  occasion  to,  not  happening  ever  to  speak  of  the  palate,  or  roof 

of  the  mouth.— yV.  H.  H.].     7)21  twice,  xiii.  11 ;  xlii.  16:  pJV  once,  xliv.  7  :  JltJ^S  frequently,  v.  15;  ix.  2,  4,  7,  etc.:  JJD^ 

once   for  XO-^,   xlviii.   18.— □"'771^.  See  i.  5;  ii.l9;  Jer.  vi.ll;  ix.  20  (21).— Ji'^3,  a  scribal  variety  for  D"^i3,  as  Mic.  iii. 

■•  T  ■  T 

3 ;  see  Is.  Iviii.  7  ;  .Ter.  xvi.  7. 

Ver.  5.— SdX  is  frequently  constructed  with  3  (Ex.  xii.  43-45  ;  Lev.  ii.  11 ;  Jud.  xiii.  16),  but  nowhere  except  here  with 

S-     Boucher  urges  the  7,  and  translates  admitted  to  dainties,  or  directed  to  dainties  [^  having  a  local  sense,  as  2  Sam.  ix. 

7,  or  Job  xii.  8.  See  Thenius].    Thenius  supposes  the  allusion  to  be  rather  to  the  external  surroundings  of  delicate  food, 

than  to  the  food  itself.    But  it  is  not  apparent  how  73X  can  mean  to  admit,  to  direct,  or  how  7  can  denote  something  around. 

If  S  is  to  be  explained  as  a  Hebraism,  tlien  we  must  adopt  a  pregnant  construction,  and  regard  7  as  dependent  on  an  omitted 

verb  of  craving  after,  longing  for.  See  Prov.  xxiii.  3,  6,  Vr\l:3  L'UrDS   IXHjT Sx,  comp.  xxiv.  1.   To  eat  after  dainties  would, 

T       -  :  -  :        T   :   • 
then,  be  the  same  as  seeking  to  eat  such.     Our  book,  however,  was  written  at  a  time  when  an  Aramaic  expression  cannot 

surprise  us.    Besides,  there  is  found  in  Jeremiah  an  undoubted  example  of  this  Aramaic  7j  as  a  nota  accusativi,  xl.  2.  [Note 

this  as  a  mark  of  Jeremiac  authorship,  that  is  a  set-off,  at  least,  against  many  of  the  trivial  exceptions  to  his  style.— W.  H. 

H.]     See  Ewald,  §277,  e.    [Gesenius  Or.,  §  151,  e.     "  It  is  a  solecism  of  the  later  style,  when  active  verbs  are  construed  with 

^7,  instead  of  the  accusative,  as  7  70X,  Lam.  iv.  5." — Gerlach  takes  the  whole  expression  adverbially,  nach  Herzenslust 
:  :       -  T 

assen,  they  ate  according  to  their  heart's  desire.— W.  H.  H.]— D''J1^0-     See  Gen.  xlix.  20  ;  1  Sam.  xv.  32;  Prov.  xxix.  17. 

■'j'ly.'O,  Jer.  Ii.  34,  is  composed  of  f  3  and  D"'Jiy  (Ps.  xxxvi.9  (8);  2  Sam.  i.  24.— ?r3t!'J-  See  Jer.  iv.  9;  Ez.  iv.  17,  where 
-T--  ■■  '  ■  ■  T-:  T 

the  word  is  used  as  here  of  persons.— 'OX  is  the  technical  word  for  the  nurture  of  children  :  see  ?0X,  Num.  xi.  12  ;  Is.  xlix. 

I  -  T  '   ■■ 

23 ;  2  Kings  x.  1,  5 ;  Esth.  ii.  7  :  fl J*DXi  Kuth  iv.  16 ;  2  Sam.  iv.  4.  The  fundamental  meaning  seems  to  be  to  carry,  support, 
raiseup;  see  HJOX  «  co'"'"'*,  tOX>  T1JX,  the  one  who  erects  a  building,  the  architect.  □"'J'SX  are  then  piestaii,  seels.  Ix. 
4.  Jeremiah  uses  Niphal,  xv.  18 ;  xlii.  5,  and  Hiphil,  xii.  6;  xl.  14,  but  only  in  an  ethical  sense.— J^7in  does  not  occur  in 
Jeremiah.— The  word  ri'lj"^3U?X  occurs  only  here.  The  plural  niBK^X  in  1  Sam.  ii.  8  ;  Ps.  cxiii.  7;  Neh.  ii.  13  ;  iii.  13,  14; 
xii.  31.  The  signification  is  undoubtedly  dirt  (Koth).  For  its  derivation,  see  Ewald,  §  1S6,  e;  Olsh.,  §  211,  a.— The  verb 
pDH)  Jeremiah  uses  in  no  form.    Piel  is  to  embrace. 


EXEGETICAL    AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  3.  Vers.  1,  2,  describe  the  misfortunes  of 
Zion  from  a  theocratic  point  of  view  ;  vers.  3-5 
show  how  terrible  they  were,  as  seen  from  a 
natural  point  of  view,  by  describing  the  piti- 
able misery  of  the  poor  children:  see  i.  5; 
ii.  11,  12,  19,  20.  Even  the  sea-monsters 
(niarg.  sen-rdlvcf;)  ^Jiiclcils,  or  wolvesl  dravy  out 
[_drcw-ou/~\  the  breast,  they  give  \_fjavc'\  suck 
to  their  young  ones.  Tliat  the  Hebrew  word 
translated  sea-monsters,  "Y^y^,  here  stands  for 
^''^r\  =  jackals  (see  Jer.  ix.  10  (11);  x.  22; 
xiv.  6,  etc.),  was  an  opinion  of  the  Masorites, 
which  many  of  the  moderns  have  adopted  from 
the  Syriac.  In  fact,  "j"—  is  the  Aramaic  plural 
ending  (see  Olsh.  §  111  b),  which  would  not  be 
surprising  here,  y^^,  as  a  singular  (see  Jer. 
Ii.  34)  is  bellua  maritima  (see  Gen.  i.  21),  which 
is  defined  at  one  time  as  a  dragon,  at  another  as 


a  whale,  at  another  as  a  crocodile,  at  another  as  a 
serpent  (comp.  Ex.  vii.  9,  10;  Deut.  xxxii.  23; 
Ps.  Ixxiv.  13,  etc.).  That  the  sea-monsters  draw 
out  for  use  the  teats,  which  are  contained  in  the 
breasts  as  in  bags  or  sheaths,  Bochart  (in  the 
Hierozoicon,  torn.  iii.  p.  777,  ed.  Rosenmiiller) 
authenticates,  by  many  evidences,  as  a  fact 
known  to  the  ancients.  There  is  on  this  account, 
therefore,  no  reason  for  departing  from  the  sense 
indicated  by  the  text.  [There  are,  however, 
several  other  reasons  for  regarding  this  word  as 
an  Aramaic  plural  for  jackals  or  for  wolves  (Ger- 
lach), which  belong  to  the  same  family.  These 
are,  1.  The  plural  forms  of  the  verbs  (drew  out, 
gave  suck)  and  of  the  suffix  (their  young-ones), 
which  would  require  D^J'^IjI?  instead  of  yJ^,  if 
sea-monsters  were  intended.  2.  The  fact  that  "lU 
is  used  of  the  whelps  of  lions,  bears,  dogs,  and 
animals  of  similar  species,  o.  The  autliority  of 
the  Masorites.  4.  The  frequent  occurrence  of 
Aramaic  forms  in  Jeremiah's  writings.  5.  Tlie 
agreement,  of  so    many  versions  and  commenta- 


CHAP.  IV.  3-5. 


153 


tors,  ancient  and  modern.  6.  The  probability 
that  jackals,  wolves,  or  animals  of  that  descrip- 
tion, would  occur  to  the  mind  of  the  Prophet  in 
connection  with  the  events  of  which  he  speaks. 
There  was  nothing  to  suggest  the  monsters  of  the 
deep,  and  the  comparison,  if  referred  to  them, 
seems  forced  and  far-fetched.  But  as  the  Pro- 
phet recalls  the  consequences  of  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  as  he  remembers  how  the  foxes 
even  now  had  possession  of  the  mountain  of  Zion, 
V.  18,  he  cannot  forget  how  hungry  beasts  of 
prey  had  revelled  in  the  land,  and  prowled  about 
the  deserted  villages  and  even  the  streets  of  Je- 
rusalem itself.  Even  those  beasts  had  shown  the 
instincts  of  natural  affection  at  least.  And  hence 
the  natural  contrast  between  them  and  the 
mothers,  who,  before  the  beasts  appeared  on  the 
scene,  forsook  their  own  babes  and  refused  to 
give  them  nourishment.  It  should  be  observed 
here  that  the  verbs  in  this  verse  and  in  all  the 
following  description  are  in  the  past  time.  The 
Prophet  ia  describing  what  had  happened  ;  not 
what  was  then  transpiring.  This  use  of  the  per- 
fect tense  shows  that  he  was  referring,  not  in 
the  abstract,  to  what  it  is  in  the  nature  of  jackals 
to  do,  but  in  the  concrete,  to  what,  had  been 
actually  observed  of  them.  Even  (the  DJ  is 
emphatic)  jackals,  that  infested  the  depopulated 
country,  drew  out  their  breast,  etc. — The  expres- 
sion cirawew^  om<  the  breast  is  suggested  by  the 
common  habit  of  women  in  drawing  out  the 
breast  from  the  covering  robe  and  presenting  it 
to  the  child  ;  a  mulieribus  lactantibus,  quse  laxatd 
veste  mammam  lactanti prsebent  (Junius,  quoted  by 
Gerlach). — W.  H.  H.] — The  daughter  of  my 
people  ia  become  cruel,  \became  cruel.  Lit. 
was  turned  into  a  cruel  one  (Gataker),  see  Job 
XXX.  21.  Calvin  says:  ''The  daughter  of  my 
people  is  come  to  the  cruel  one,  for  the  people  had 
to  do  with  nothing  but  cruelty,  .  .  .  He,  then,  does 
not  accuse  the  people  of  cruelty,  that  they  did 
not  nourish  their  children,  but  on  the  contrary, 
he  means  that  they  were  given  up  to  cruel  ene- 
mies." But  the  preceding  part  of  this  verse  and 
what  follows  in  vers.  4,  5,  and  especially  in  the 
climax  presented  in  ver.  10,  require  the  sense 
given  in  our  English  version,  in  which  the  ver- 
sions agree  with  great  unanimity.  The  Prophet 
gives  us  a  frightful  instance  of  the  effect  of  suf- 
fering and  starvation.  Mothers  became  more 
unnatural  than  jackals  or  hyenas  that  suckle 
their  young;  and  forsook  thjir  babes,  not  merely 
to  avoid  the  sight  of  pains  they  could  not  allevi- 
ate, but  to  escape  the  exhausting  demands  upon 
their  own  waning  strength, — nay,  the  mania 
induced  by  extreme  suffering  destroyed  their 
affection  for  their  children — W.H.  H.] — Like 
the  ostriches  in  the  -wilderness.  In  refer- 
ence to  the  want  of  feeling  towards  its  young  in 
the  ostrich,  Thenius  refers  to  Oken's  Natural 
History  (vii.  s.  655,  _^.).  See  Bochart,  Hieroz. 
P.  II.  L.  II.  cap.  14,  pag.  824;  cap.  17,  pag.  854 
seqq.    ed     Rosbnm.  —  Winbb  R.   W.   B.    s.    v. 


Strauss.  Job  xxxix.  13-17.  ["  On  the  least 
noise  or  trivial  occasion  she  forsakes  her  eggs 
or  her  young  ones,  to  which  perhaps  she  never 
returns  ;  or  if  she  does,  it  may  be  too  late  either 
to  restore  life  to  the  one,  or  to  preserve  the  lives 
of  the  others.  Agreeably  to  this  account,  the 
Arabs  meet  sometimes  with  whole  nests  of  these 
eggs  undisturbed  ;  some  of  them  are  sweet  and 
good,  others  are  addled  and  corrupted ;  others 
again  have  their  young  ones  of  different  growth, 
according  to  the  time,  it  may  be  presumed,  they 
may  have  been  forsaken  of  the  dam.  They  often 
meet  with  a  few  of  the  little  ones  no  bigger 
than  well-grown  pullets,  half-starved,  straggling, 
and  moaning  about,  like  so  many  distressed 
orphans,  for  their  mother."  (Shaw's  Travels, 
quoted  by  Notes).  "  The  Arabs  call  the  ostrich 
the  impious  or  ungodly  bird,  on  account  of  its 
neglect  and  cruelty  towards  its  young,"  (Barnes 
on  Job  xxxix.  13).] 

Ver.  4.  The  tongue  of  the  sucking  child 
cleaveth  [^cleaved]  to  the  roof  of  his  mouth 
for  thirst.  See  Job  xxix.  10;  Ps.  cxxxvii.  6, 
comp.  xxii.  16  (15) ;  Ez.  iii.  26. — Young  chil- 
dren ask  l^asked]  bread  [see  ii.  11,  l".i],  and 
no  man  breaketh  it  unto  them  [and  there 
was  no  one  to  break  to  them~\. 

Ver.  5.  They  that  did  feed  delicately, 
they  that  ate  dainties  [or,  fed  on  dainties,  Calvin, 
Blayney,  Boothroyd,  Henderson,  Noyes]. — 
Are  desolate  in  the  streets,  perish  [perished'\ 
on  the  streets,  [}'.  e.  by  starvation,  while  seeking 
in  vain  for  food. — W.  H.  IL] — They  that  were 
brought  up  in  scarlet,  they  who  were  carried  on 
crimson  [carried  on  cloths,  or  borne  on  couches 
of  scarlet,  crimson,  or  purple  color,  made  of 
costly  materials  of  Tyrian  dyes. — W.H.H.]  Scar- 
let, the  red  dying  material,  got  from  the  cochi- 
neal worm;  see  Ex.  xvi.  20;  Is.  i.  18. — Embrace 
dunghills,  embrace  the  dirt  [embraced  dirt-heaps, 
the  heaps  of  dirt,  refuse  {rubbish,  Fuerst's  Lex.), 
lying  in  the  streets  of  the  city.— W.  H.  H.]  To 
embrace  the  dirt  (see  Job  xxiv.  8,  embrace  the  rock) 
can  only  mean  to  have  it  between  the  arms, 
which  is  done  by  them  who  lie  in  the  dirt.  Ster- 
quilinea  arripiunt,  et  super  ea  veluti  toto  corpore  in- 
cumbunt,  ut  fame  confecti  cibum  inde  eruant.  (They 
eagerly  grasp  the  dunghills,  stretched  out  upon 
them,  as  it  were  at  full  length,  that,  dying  of 
hunger,  they  may  thence  seize  their  food). — 
Pareau.  [The  idea  of  seeking  food  in  the  dirt- 
heaps  of  the  city  streets,  confuses  the  two  very 
distinct  members  of  this  verse.  Little  children, 
who  had  been  fed  on  delicacies,  perished  in  the 
streets  while  vainly  seeking  food ;  and  thus, 
those,  who  had  been  borne  on  costly  couches 
covered  with  the  richest  goods,  lay  now  dying, 
with  outstretched  hands  embracing,  as  it  were,- 
the  heaps  of  filth  in  the  city  streets.  To  embrace 
the  dust  is  a  familiar  image  in  all  languages :  to 
embrace  the  dirt-heaps  of  an  oriental  city,  so 
proverbially  filthy,  intensifies  the  figure.  The 
whole  description  is  highly  poetical. — W.  H.  H.] 


154 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


IV.  6. 

6  For  the  punishment  of  the  iniquity  of  the  daughter  of  my  people  is  greater  than 
the  punishment  of  the  sin  of  Sodom,  that  was  overthrown  as  in  a  moment,  and  no 
hands  stayed  on  her. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  6.  The  expression  riD^Sn  is  taken  from  Gen.  xix.  25  (□■'^y^l~^^X  "^tTi  '1,   comp.  Jer.  xx.  16,  and  r\3£3n02Ji 
T       -:  •  TV        V      I     -:|~  -••:-: 

Deut.  xxix.  22  ;  Is.  xiii.  19 ;  Am.  iv.  11  ;  Jer.  1.  40). — !|  7n  is  derived,  not  from  7!|n,  but  from  71 /H  (so  derived  apparently 

T  T    T 

by  the  Sept.  and  Syr.).  The  latter  denotes  to  relax,  to  be  po^verless,  Judg.  xvi.  7  ;  Is.  Ivii.  10  ;  it  can  also  very  well  be  said 
»f  the  hands,  and  there  is  no  necessity  of  resorting,  by  any  artificial  method,  to  a  modification  of  the  idea  of  gyrare.  In 
reference  to  this  word,  see  Jer.  v.  3.  Jer.  uses  the  Kal  of  7^J,  v.  27,  and  the  Hiphil,  xlviii.  26,  42. —  Tiy  is  frequent  with 
him,  ii.  22;  iii.  13:  xiii.  22;  etc.— ■'r3_J?-r\3,  see  ii.  11.— riXtDFl  often  in  Jer.  xvi.  10;  xvii.  13;  etc.— j;jn  also,  iv.  20; 
xviii.  7,  9. — ^^J1~103  occurs  only  here  ;  yet  see  J^J'^3,  Num.  xvi.  21;  xvii.  10;  Ps.  xiii.  19. 


EXEGETICAL   AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  6.  With  this  verse  the  Poet  concludes  the 
first  part  of  his  Song.  This  verse  corresponds 
to  ver.  11,  which  constitutes  a  similar  conclusion. 
In  both  cases  the  Poet  draws  a  general  inference 
from  the  preceding  particular  facts,  which  he 
had  related  in  detail.  In  this  verse  the  inference 
is,  that  the  guilt  of  Zion  was  proved  to  be  greater 
than  the  sin  of  Sodom. — For  the  punishment 
of  the  iniquity  (marg.  For  the  i/iiquiti/)  of  the 
daughter  of  my  people  is  greater  than  the 
punishment  of  the  sin  of  Sodom. — And  the 
guilt  of  the  daughter  of  my  people  loas  greater  than 
the  sin  of  Sodom.  I  cannot  agree  with  those  who 
take  ']')}?  and  PXtSn  in  the  sense  of  the  punish- 
ment of  sin.  This  sense  is  not  capable  of  proof. 
In  all  the  cases  appealed  to  for  this  purpose 
(Gen.  iv.  13;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  10;  2  Sam.  xvi.  1'-'; 
Is.  v.  18  ;  Ps.  xxxi.  11),  on  more  exact  examina- 
tion, their  original  meaning  of  sin,  guilt,  appears 
to  be  their  real  meaning.  And  this  is  true  in 
reference  to  nxtOn,  for  which  some  would  justify 
the  sense  of  poena  peccati,  from  the  passages  Num. 
xxxii.  23;   Is.  xl.  2  ;   Zech.  xiv.  9.     See  Drech- 

SLER  on  Is.  V.  18.  In  /"^r]  ^  was  greater,  lies, 
then,  the  thought,  it  being  allowable  to  infer  the 
cause  from  the  effect,  that  Zion's  guilt  is  shown 
to  be  greater  tlian  was  the  sin-guiltiness  (Siin- 
denschuld)  of  Sodom.     There  is  certainly  in  the 

vav   before     7^r    a    causal   intimation.     For   it 

amounts  to  the  same  thing,  as  far  as  the  sense  is 
concerned,  whether  I  infer  the  eifect  from  the 
cause  with  the  words  and  so,  or  the  cause  from 
.the  effect  with  the  word /or.  This  causal  use  of 
the  vav,  moreover,  is  sufficiently  established ; 
see  Ps.  vii.  10;  Ix.  13;  xcv.  5;  Prov.  xxiii.  3; 
Gen.  xxii.  12;  Jer.  xvi.  12;  xxiii.  36;  xxxi.  3; 
Is.  xxxix.  1;  Hos.  iv.  4;  vi.  4;  etc.  See  my 
Gr.  §  110,  1.  [The  Vav  coordinates  the  propo- 
sition with  what  precedes  in  the  relation  of  cause 
to  effect.  These  things  were  so,  for  the  sin  was 
greater,  etc.  As  the  vav  is  here  the  initial  letter, 
the  stress  laid  upon  it  shows  the  masterly  man- 
ner in  which  tlie  author  of  the  poem  often  makes 
the  acrostic,  which  in  common  hands  would  be 
constrained  and  merely  artificial,  contribute  to 


the  spirit  and  force  of  the  sentiment.  This  is 
true,  whether  we  take  the  words  discussed,  in  the 
sense  of  sin  or  the  punishment  oj  sin;  but  the  fact 
that  it  is  emphatic  is  an  argument  in  favor  of  the 
sense  in  which  Dr.  Naegelsbach  construes  it, 

and  this  added  to  the  doubt  whether  "j-ij^  and 
nXISn  ever  do  mean  the  punishment  of  sin,  may 
decide  us  in  favor  of  his  translation.  The  other 
translation  gives  good  sense  and  fits  in  admi- 
rably witli  the  context,  and  is  adopted  without 
hesitation  by  all  the  English  versions  and  com- 
mentators (except  Wordsworth),  and  by  Calvin 
and  Gerlach.  Yet  Calvin  says:  "If  any  one 
prefers  the  other  version,  I  will  not  contend,  for 
it  is  not  unsuitable ;  and  hence  also  a  most  useful 
doctrine  may  be  drawn,  that  we  are  to  judge  of 
the  grievousness  of  our  sins  by  the  greatness  of 
our  punishment;  for  God  never  exceeds  what  is 
just  when  He  takes  vengeance  on  the  sins  of  men. 
Then  His  severity  shows  how  grievously  men 
have  sinned.  Tlius,  Jeremiah  may  have  reasoned 
from  the  effect  to  the  cause,  and  declared  that 
the  people  had  been  more  wicked  than  the  Sodo- 
mites. Nor  is  this  unreasonable;  for  .  .  .  the 
Prophets  everywhere  charged  them  as  men  who 
not  only  equalled  but  also  surpassed  the  Sodo- 
mites, especially  Ezekiel  (xvi.  46,  47).  Isaiah 
also  called  them  the  people  of  Gomorrah,  and  the 
king's  counsellors  and  judges,  the  princes  of 
Sodom  (Is.  i.  9,  10).  This  mode  of  speaking  is 
then  common  in  the  Prophets,  and  the  meaning 
is  not  unsuitable."  The  Sept.  translates  both 
words  avouia;  the  Vulg.  one  iniquitas,  the  other 
peccatum. — W.  H.  H.]. — Thatv^as  overthrovrn 
as  in  a  moment.  Sodom's  guilt  was  great,  and 
the  punishment  decreed  for  it  cori-esponded  to 
the  greatness  of  its  sin:  it  was  destroyed  instan- 
taneously by  fire  falling  from  Heaven  (see  Gen, 
xix.  25),  wliereby  its  punisliment  was  proved  to 
be  supernatural  and  divinitus  immissa  [sent  from 
God].  It  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands 
of  tlielivingGod  (Heb.  X.  31).  [Bl.wney:  "Sodom 
was  destroyed  by  a  sudden  act  of  God,  which  the 
Prophet  thinks  preferable  to  lingering  and  wast- 
ing away  with  disease  or  want,  as  was  the  case  in 
Jerusalem  during  the  long  siege."] — And  no 
hands  stayed  on  her — andnohands  became  slack 
[relaxed)  the rehij.  Tiiat  Sodom  was  destroyed,  not 
by  the  hands  of  men,  but  by  the  hand  of  God 


CHAP.  IV.  7-9.  ,  155 


alone,  is  a  fact  that  is  emphasized  as  giving  in-  to  the  suddenness  of  the  destruction,  and  form* 
tensity  to  the  severity  of  its  punishment.  Yet,  ing  a  parallelism  with  the  preceding  clause,  over- 
our  Poet  would  say,  the  fate  of  Jerusalem  waa  throvm  as  in  a  moment.  Owen  translates,  and  not 
still  more  terrible,  because  its  guilt  was  greater  wearied  against  (or  over)  her  were  hands,  and  says, 
than  Sodom's.  With  what  propriety  this  could  "  This  is  substantially  the  Sept.  and  Syr.  Gro- 
be  affirmed,  is  easily  comprehended.  For  there  tius  says  that  the  meaning  is,  that  Sodom  was 
had  not  been  on  the  part  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  !  destroyed  not  by  human  means,  that  is,  not  by  a 
such  fulness  of  manifestation  of  the  long-suifer-  siege  as  Jerusalem  had  been."  Wordsworth: 
ing  love  of  God,  as  in  the  case  of  Jerusalem,  (see  ;  ^'■Andno  handswere  weary  on  her.  No  human  hands 
Jer.  vii.  13,  25;  xi.  7;  xxv.  4;  Ez.  xvi.  46-48;  j  were  wearied  by  destroying  her,  but  she  was 
Is.  i.  10;  Matt.  xi.  23,  24).  But  if  it  be  asked,  [  suddenly  consumed  by  the  hand  of  God."  If  we 
in  what  respect  Jerusalem's  fate  had  been  more 
dreadful  than  that  of  Sodom,  the  answer,  it  seems 
to  me,  is  contained  in  the  J^J^~iD3=as  in  a  mo- 
ment. Sodom's  sufferings  in  death  were  brief: 
there  were  no  starving  children,  no  mothers  who 
cooked   their    children.     Jerusalem's   sufferings 


accept  of  the  usual  derivation  of  the  verb  from 

7^n,  then  the  translation  of  Thenius  may  be 
commended  for  its  simplicity,  and  is  supported 
by  the  dual  form  of  U]'~\''=hands,  and  no  one  in  her 
icrnny   the   hands.     But,   as  Gerlach   shows,  the 


were  long  and  protracted,  whereby  was  produced  ^1"'''  *'oi'°i  is  constantly  used  for  the  plural  (see 
that  horrible  crime!  Eversio  Sodomse  fuit  t«s<ar  Q'T-'^^,  all  hands,  Is.  xiii.  7),  and  the  verb  Sm 
subitse    apoplexise,  eversio   autem    Hierosolymx  fuit    -"^7     •,-»,,        ,.  „,        ,.  , 

instar  lentx  tabis  [the  overthrow  of  Sodom  was  a  ^'  ""^'^  '^"^  ?  "^  ^^^  o^J^^t'  of  brandishing  the 
kind  of  sudden  apoplexy,  but  the  overthrow  of    sword  against  the  cities  of  Ephraim  (Hos.  xi.  6): 


Jerusalem  was  a  kind  of  slow  consumption],  says 
FoKSTER  [Dr.  Naegelsbach  has  not  made  his 
sense  of  this  difficult  clause  very  apparent.  It 
seems  hardly  credible  that  T\'2  should  mean  there- 
by (dadurch).  If  the  verb  is  derived  from  ThX\, 
instead  of  7^n,  the   translation  of   either  Blat- 


we  may,  therefore,  understand  the  seuse  to  be, 
and  no  hands  (i.  e.,  human  hands)  were  wrung 
round  (or  brandished)  against  it,  men's  hands  were 
not  brought  against  it.  This  seems  to  correspond 
with  Dr.  Naegelsbach's  interpretation,  and  is 
the  sense  generally  adopted.  Boothroyd:  With- 
out the  hands  of  men.     Henderson:  And  no  hands 


NET    or    Owen,   is    to    be    preferred.      'B'lky-h^yI  attacked  her.    '^oyes;  Though  no  hands  came  against 
translates  nor  were  hands  weakened  in  her,  referring  her. — W.  H.  H.] 


IV.  7-9. 

7  Her  Nazarites  were  purer  than  snow,  they  were  whiter  than  milk,  they  were 

8  more  ruddy  in  body  than  rubies,  tlieir  polishing  ivas  of  sapphire  :  Their  visage  is 
blacker  than  a  coal ;  they  are  not  known  in  the  streets ;  their  skin  cleaveth  to  their 

9  bones ;  it  is  withered,  it  is  become  like  a  stick.  They  that  be  slain  with  the  sword 
are  better  than  they  that  he  slain  with  hunger :  for  these  pine  away,  stricken  through 
for  want  of  the  fruits  of  the  field. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  7. — !|2)T.    The  word  occurs  only  in  Job  xv.  15 ;  xxv.  5  ;  and  in  Hiph.,  Job  ix.  30. — T^IJ  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah. 

~  'T 

[Yet  'n'lTJ,  Jer.  vii.  29,  is  aremarkable  coincidence  in  the  use  of  language,  if  D'TIJ  means  crowned-ones,  as  Dr.  Naegelsbach 
guggesta. — W.  H.  H.] — J7ty,  Jer.  xviil.  14. — The  verb  Pn^,  splendidum  esse,  nitere,  is  found  only  here.    The  adjective  H^f 

in  Jer.  iv.  11.— 3*7)1  in  Jeremiah  only  In  the  phrase  M   ^/H   iUT   V^N,  xi.  5;  xxxii.  22. — Kal  DIX  is  found  only  here. 

T    T  T  T  ~T         I     '.■  V  -  T 

The  sense  without  liuubt  is  <o6erc(f,  reddish.  The  same  meaning  adheres  to  the  derived  conjugations,  Pual  (Ex.  xxv.  5,  xxvi.  14; 

XXXV.  7,  23  ;  Keh.  ii.  4),  Hiph.  (Is.  i.  IS),  HitUpael  (Is.  i.  18).     The  word  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah. — Di'J^  (in  Jer.  viii.  1 ; 

XX.  9;  xxiii.  9)  stands  here  as  pars  pro  toto.    See  Prov.  xv.  30;  xvi.  24;  and  D^f^',  Ps.  cxxxix.  15.     [Blatney  absurdly 

translates,  They  were  ruddier  on  the  bone,  and  thus  explains,  "  In  the  preceding   line  the  whiteness  of  their  skin  is  de- 

icribed;  in  this  their  flesh,  which  was  red  underneath  towards  the  bone,  marking  their  high  health."] — T'3D  (see  Ez.  i. 

26  ;  X.  1)  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah. 

Ver.  8. — 'nt^n-    Jeremiah  uses  the  Hiphil,  only  once,  xiii.  16. — "lint!'  occurs  only  here  (see  lintJ'.  Jer.  ii.  18).    [The 

translation  of  Blatnet,  duskier  than  the  dawn,  and  of  Hendekson,  darker  than  the  dawn,  would  require  us  to  read  inE?,  imd 

then  the  comparison  could  only  be  with  the  darkness  of  the  very  early  dawn,  and  would  be  an  awkward  figure  at  that. — W. 

H.  U.J — DlXn.  See  Jer.  xi.  16.— 03J)  Niph.  of  UJ,  see  Prov.  xxvi.  24  ;  Job  xxxiv.  19.    In  Jeremiah  Piel  is  found,  xix.  4, 

tt:|t  :  •  "  t  . 

«nd  Fiphil  xxiv.  5. — ^^V,Jirm^■<er  adhserere,  only  here. — D"1iy,  see  iii.  4. — cljl   E'3*,  see  Jos.  ii.  5.    In  Jeremiah  the  verb 

-T  .  T  -T 

^3'  is  often  found,  xxiii.  10 ;  1.  38,  etc.    The  adjective  1^3^  he  never  uses. — yp  is  frequent  in  Jeremiah,  ii.  20;  iii.  6, 9, 13,  etc. 

Ver.  9. — For  the  meaning  of  DOIDi  see  iii.  26. — The  expression  JTH    -'^n,  i»  found  in  Jer.  xiv.  18,  but  is'  especially 

/requent  with  Rzekiel,  xxxj.  17,18;  xxxii.  21-31. — tJ?  relativum,  see  ii.  15.— ."J^p.     The  word  is  found  in  Jeremiah  o:;;y  in 


15t> 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


xlix.  4,  and  then  in  another  sense.  Here  it  must  evidently  denote  the  dissolTing  of  life,  i. «.,  the  lingering  dying  of  tho 
starving.  The  word  does  not,  indeed,  occur  elsewhere  in  this  sense,  for  everywhere  else  it  stands  for  the  virile  flux  or  femalu 
menses,  or  for  confluence  or  abundant  flowing  together  (OJI  r\2f  VIN,  Ex.  iii.  8,  etc.),  or  for  copious  water-floods  (Ps. 
Ixxviii.  20;  cv.  41 ;  Is.  xlviii.  21).  But  the  connection  absolutely  requires  us  to  take  the  idea  of  flowing,  which  the  ■word 
undoubtedly  has,  in  this  modification  of  it.     Pareau,  also,  with  propriety,  calls  attention  to  the  closely  related  wordJXli 

—    T 

tahescere  (Jer.  xxxi.  12,  25 ,  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  10).  He  also  shows  that  in  the  Latin,  a  similar  affinity  exists  between  tabescere  and 
Uquescrre.  For  as  Seneua  at  one  time  says  (Epist.  26)  iitcummodum  summum  est  minui  et  deperire  et,  ut  propria  dicam, 
liquesi-ere.  so  he  says  annther  time,  (Midea,  ver.  590),  V»  rivos  nivibus  snJufis  anle  jam  /nrti,  medinqu«  ver^  tabuit  TTspmus. 
[See  critical  notes  below.] — 0^"^p"T3-    Jeremiah  uses  the  word  twice,  xxxvii.  10 ;  li.  i,  and  both  times  the  Part.  Paul. — X'he 

expression  n"^  illS^Jil  is  found  iu  Deut.  xxxii.  13;  comp.  Ez.  xxxvi.  30;  Is.  xxvii.  6;  .TiK^g.  ix.  11.     HJ^Jj^  does  not  oc- 

-  T  .:  T       : 

cur  in  Jeremiah,  but  ^^ty  does,  iv.  17  ;  xviii.  14.     ?r3,  here,  cannot  possibly  have  the  positive  sense  of  giving  out,  failure,  or 

that  of  positive  causality.  It  must  rather  be  taken  in  its  negative  sense,  away,  far  from,  without.  See  ver.  18 ;  and  Jer. 
xlviii.  45  ;  Job  xi.  15  ;  xxi.  9.    See  my  Gr.,  g  112,  5  d. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  7-11.  The  plan  of  tliis  part  [which  may 
be  regarded  a  the  antistrophe  to  vers.  1-6. — 
W.  H.  H.]  is  exactly  similar  to  that  of  vers.  1-6. 
It  begins  with  a  description  of  what  the  Princes 
cf  Zion  had  to  suffer.  This  description  corres- 
ponds evidently  to  what  was  said  generally  of  the 
sons  of  Zion,  vers.  1,  2,  of  whom  the  Princes  are 
the  flower.  But  vers.  7-9  form  a  climax  to  vers. 
1,  2,  which  appears  in  the  fact  that  what  is  said 
of  the  Princes  of  Zion,  in  vers.  8,  9,  surpasses 
what  is  said  of  the  sons  of  Zion  in  the  last  clause 
of  ver.  2.  Ver.  10  corresponds  in  a  similar  way 
with  vers.  3-6,  what  was  said  there,  being  sur- 
passed here.  Ver.  11,  finally,  corresponds  with 
ver.  6;  for  like  it,  ver.  11  contains  a  definite, 
comprehensive  and  inferential  conclusion. 

Ver.  7.  Her  Nazarites — her  Princes.  That 
D''^'TJ  here  cannot  denote  the  Nazarites  is  evi- 
dent, not  so  much  from  the  description  which  is 
givtn  of  them,  for  that  would  be  very  suitable  to  a 
Samson  for  instance,  as  from  the  fact  that  the 
Nazarites  were  a  mere  fraction  of  the  whole  peo- 
ple, too  scattered  and  numerically  insignificant 
to  be  mentioned  here  with  such  particularity. 
Rather  as  tliey  [the  Nazarites]  were  said  to  be 
coronali,  crowned  ones,  from  their    unshorn    hair 

[see  Num.  vi.  19,  niJ~ilK  in7J(^'7=^«*  croivn  is 
shaven  off  of  him;  '\'}}},  the  unshorn  hair,  ov  crown, 
Jer.  vii.  29.— AV.  H.  H.],  so  the  Poet  here  calls 
the  Princes  crow7ied  ones  [see  "^O,  to  encircle, 
hence  "^H,  a  crown,  diadem  or  chaplet. — W.  H.  H.] 
from  the  golden  crown  which  they  wore.  It  is 
true  this  is  a  poetical  expression,  which  is  not  of 
frequent  occurrence;  for  we  can  only  compare 
Gen.  xlix.  20  (Deut.  xxxiii.  16),  where  Joseph  is 
called  Vnx  TJJ,  the  crowned  one  among  his  brothers. 
It  is,  besides,  very  apparent  that  the  Poet  was 
required  to  select  a  subject,  to  which  the  brilliant 
predicates,  which  he  heaps  up  in  ver.  7,  would 
be  appropriate.  [Gataker gives  the  same  mean- 
ing and  derivation  to  the  word,  and  refers  to 
Nah.  iii.  17,  'ij''."}'^.'?,  thy  crowned  ones,  or  honora- 
ble ones.  It  seems  more  likely,  however,  that  the 
word  designates  Princes  or  nobles,  not  from  any 
allusion  to  their  being  crowned,  which  is  not  ob- 
vious, but  because  they  constituted  a  separate  and 
distiriguished  class  of  persons,  were  set  apart  for 
111  norahle  offices,  as  the  Nazarites  were  for 
strictly  religious  services  [non  volo  sed  dignitale 


separati;  Nolditts,  quoted  by  Gerlach).  So 
Calvin  explains  the  word  in  Gen.  xlix.  26,  and 
Blayney  and  Gerlach  here.  Boothroyd  trans- 
lates 7iobles.  Noyes,  princes.  Henuehson  re- 
tains the  word  Nazarites. — W.  H.  H.] — Were 
purer — more  shining  [glistening,  gldnzender'\.  The 
word  in  Job  xv.  15;  xxv.  5,  represents  the 
brightness  of  the  heavens  and  the  stars. — Than 
snow.  The  comparison  with  the  glistening 
white  snow  is  found  also  in  Ps.  li.  9  (7);  Is.  i. 
18. — They  -were  w^hiter  than  milk.  [Purer 
t/ian  snoiv,  whiter  than  inilk,  according  to  ordinary 
Bible  usage,  are  beautiful  metaphors  for  inno- 
cency  of  character  and  life.  Here,  however,  they 
refer  entirely  to  physical  appearance,  the  re- 
splendent beauty  of  their  complexion,  as  is  plain 
from  what  follows :  not  of  their  garments,  as  some 
have  imagined,  but  of  their  bodies,  as  is  evident 
from  the  antithesis  in  the  next  verse. — W.  H.  H.] 
— They  vrere  more  ruddy  in  body  than 
rubies  (Rolblicher  strahlten  sie  am  Leibe  als 
Korallen),  their  body  was  of  a  more  reddish  hue  than 
corals.  "Red  on  white  is  the  normal  color  of  ».he 
human  complexion,  the  prime-color  of  beauty. 
Cant.  V.  10 ;  Lam.  iv.  7,"  says  Delitzsch,  Psychol., 
p.  75.  [Calvin,  understanding  Nazarites  as  in- 
tended, supposes  that  their  red  color  was  a  mark 
and  evidence  of  God's  favor  as  in  the  cases  of  the 
Hebrew  children  recorded  in  Daniel.  "  We 
know  that  the  Nazarites  abstained  from  wine  and 
strong  drink:  hence  abstinence  m'ght  have 
lessened  somewhat  of  their  ruddiness.  For  he 
who  is  accustomed  to  drink  wine,  if  he  abstains 
for  a  time,  is  apt  to  grow  pale;  he  will  then  lose 
almost  all  his  color,  at  least  he  will  not  be  so 
ruddy;  nor  will  there  appear  iu  his  face  and  in 
his  members  so  much  vigor  as  when  he  took  his 
ordinary  support.  Jeremiah,  in  short,  teaches 
us  that  the  blessing  of  God  was  conspicuous  in 
the  Nazarites,  for  He  wonderfully  supported 
them  while  they  were  for  a  time  abstinents." 
This  necessity  of  appealing  to  a  possible  miracle 
may  itself  create  a  doubt,  if  Nazarites  are  here 
referred  to  at  all.  That  in  such  a  corrupt  state 
of  society  as  existed,  at  that  period  of  their  his- 
tory, among  the  Jews,  there  were  many  who  as- 
sumed the  vows  of  the  Nazarite,  is  doubtful. 
There  is  no  allusion  to  the  existence  even  of 
Nazarites  among  the  people  at  this  time,  in  either 
the  prophetical  or  historical  books.  But  that 
there  was  not  only  such  a  class,  but  that  they 
were  so  remarkable  for  their  piety  and  so  ac- 
ceptable to  God,  that  God  gave  them  such  evi- 
dences of  His  favor  as  were  bestowed  on  Daniel 


CHAP.  IV.  7-9. 


157 


and  his  brethren,  making  them  conspicuous 
among  men  by  their  personal  beauty,  especially 
by  the  ruddiness  of  their  complexion,  we  cannot 
believe.  And  it  would  be  incredible  and  horri- 
ble that  upon  that  particular  class  the  heaviest 
judgments  descended,  as  is  related  in  the  next 
verse.  If  we  infer  from  their  personal  beauty, 
in  ver.  7,  that  they  were  special  favorites  of 
Heaven,  we  must  conclude,  from  the  transforma- 
tion of  their  appearance  into  that  of  ugliness,  in 
ver.  8,  that  they  were  also  special  objects  of  Di- 
vine wrath.  The  two  things  do  not  agree.  This 
alone  proves  that  Nazarites  are  not  intended. 
The  description  of  their  personal  appearance, 
which  could  only  apply  to  Nazarites,  by  some 
such  forced  construction  as  requires  Calvin  to 
invoke  the  aid  of  a  miracle,  is  entirely  appro- 
priate to  that  class  of  the  nobility  represented  by 
the  Princes,  who  lived  delicately  and  luxuriously, 
and  whose  faces,  not  embrowned  by  exposure  to 
the  wejitlier,  nor  seamed  and  roughened  by  alife 
of  harlsliip,  were  flushed  and  shining  from  the 
effects  of  high  living,  and  whose  persons  beamed 
and  glistened,  as  it  were,  from  the  care  bestowed 
upon  them,  and  the  pains  taken  to  beautify  and 
adorn  themselves.  Perhaps  the  idea  conveyed 
by  the  Hebrew  verbs  of  ihe  fflistenhiff  quality  of 
their  white  and  red  coinplpxion,  may  be  due  to 
the  then  prevailing  use  of  unguents. — W.  H. 
H.] — Rubies,  corals,  D'J'JD.  Concerning  this 
word,  which  occurs  besides  in  Job  xxviii.  18  ; 
Prov.  iii.  15;  viii.  11  ;  xx.  15  ;  xxxi.  10,  opinions 
are  much  divided.  The  translations  are  entirely 
at  variance:  Sept.  }ii-&oi,  Symm.  to,  TvepiliTiETrra, 
Cliald.  lapides  pretiosi,  Syr.  sardinus,  .Jerome, 
ebur  antiquum.  Among  the  moderns,  Bootius 
(animadit  ss.,  IV.  3),  whom  J.  D.  Michaelis, 
GrESENiits.  Maurer  and  Thenius  [Henderson, 
Notes,  Uerlach,  Fuerst]  follow,  maintains  the 
signification  to  be  corals ;  against  which  Bochart 
(HiEROZ.  P.  ii.,  L.  v..  Cap.  0,  7,  ed.,  Rosenm., 
Tom.  iii.,  pag.  601  seqq.)  contends  for  pearls. 
His  opinion  is  especially  maintained  by  Pareau 
(not  on  this  passage,  but  in  his  remarks  on  Job 
xxviii.)  and  supported  with  new  arguments. 
Leyrer  also  (in  Herz.  R.-Enc.  XI.,  p.  399)  is  in- 
clined to  adopt  this  side.  The  decision  is  diffi- 
cult. Corals  agree  best  with  the  context,  since 
the  existence  of  reddish  pearls  is  too  slightly 
established,  and  the  meaning  oi  glistening  for  the 
Hebrew    DIX    is    entirely   hypothetical. — Their 

polishing  Tvas  of  sapphire,  a  sapphire  was 
their  form. — Their  polishing,  their  form,  Ger. 
Gestalt;  Fr.  tuilie;  hut.  forma,  figuia  [Eng.  mien, 
general  appearance^.  The  word  (mtJ,  from  "^IJ 
iii.  54)  occurs  in  this  sense  only  here.  In  the 
description  of  Ezekiel's  temple  it  is  u«ed  of  the 
northern  poi-ch,  xli.  12-15;  xlii.  1,  10,  13.  [Blay- 
ney,  after  Braunius  (see  Pictorial  Bible),  taking 
the  word    from   "^U   to   divide,  or   intersect,  trans- 

-T 

lates,  their  veining  was  the  sapphire;  alluding  to 
the  blue  veins  appearing  through  the  white  and 
red  complexions.  So  Boothroyd  and  Adam 
Clarke.  This  would  be  either  a  mark  of  beauty, 
or  an  intimation  of  the  bloated  condition  of  the 
luxurious  and  pampered  nobility.  In  either  case, 
the  sense  is  good,  and  is  recommended  by  the  fact 
that  snow,  milk  and  corals  indicate  color,  and 
therefore  sapphire,  too,  would  naturally  suggest 


the  characteristic  color  of  that  gem.  iTlTJ,  how- 
ever, would  more  likely  indicate  the  cutting  of  a 
gem,  and  hence  its/o»-w,  taille,  and  in  case  of  the 
sapphire,  which  is  next  in  hardness  to  the 
diamond,  its  brilliancy  of  appearance.  Gerlach: 
"The  words  are  not  to  be  understood  of  color 
(as  of  the  veins  showing  through,  or  of  the  gar- 
ments, as  Cant,  xxviii.  18),  but,  on  account  of  the 
characteristic  T\'^U,  excisio,  taille,  of  the  perfect 
shape,  the  consummate  beauty  of  bodily  form 
(Kbrperbau).  Sapphire  was  their  form  (Gestalt), 
that  is  to  say,  so  beautiful  and  without  fault,  as 
if  they  were  a  polished  image  made  out  of  pre- 
cious stone." — W.  H.  H.]  White  as  milk  and 
snow,  red  as  corals,  and  shining  as  sapphire,  is 
the  appearance  of  the  nobles  as  here  described. 
This  seems  to  constitute  a  climax  to  vers.  1,  2: 
for  the  Poet  evidently,  in  ver.  7,  paints  with 
gayer  and  more  variegated  colors. 

Ver.  8.  In  glaring  contrast  with  ver.  7,  he  now 
describes  what  has  befallen  the  nobles  in  con- 
sequence of  the  great  catastrophe. — Their  vis- 
age— their  appearance  [so  Blayney,  Henderson, 
Owen,  Gerlach:  their  countenance,  Notes:  their 
visage,  Broughton,  Boothroyd]. — Is  [was,  or 
became.  The  verbs  are  all  in  the  past  tense.  So 
Gataker  and  Owen  render  them.  The  Prophet 
is  still  looking  back  to  what  had  taken  place, 
though  now  to  a  time  posterior  to  that  indicated 
<n  ver.  7-  He  is  describing  the  change  that  took 
place  in  the  appearance  of  the  nobles,  while  the 
city  was  still  standing,  and  they  were  seen  in  the 
streets. — W.  H.  H]  Blacker  than  a  coal  - 
darker  than  blackness  [so  marg.  E.  V.,  Calvin, 
Boothroyd,  Gerlach,  Wordsworth.  Brough- 
ton and  NoYES,  like  the  E.  V.  Vulg.,  Rashi,  Kim- 
CHi,  black  coals.  Sept.,  soot.  Owen  suggests 
darker  than  Sihor,  or  the  river  Nile,  see  Jer.  ii. 
18.]  They  are  not  \_werenot']  knoTvn — recog- 
nized — in  the  streets.  See  ver.  5.  The  sense  is, 
in  their  houses  they  might  perhaps  be  recognized, 
but  not  on  the  streets — Their  skin  cleaveth 
[_cle(iccd'\  to  their  bones.  See  Job  xix.  20; 
XXX.  30. — It  is  -withered,  it  is  become  like 
a  stick — it  is  [iV  became~\  dry  as  icood.  [The 
English  version — it  is  withered — arose  from  taking 
the  adjective  dry,  for  the  verb  to  dry.  No  other 
English  version  has  it  so. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  9.  This  verse  enters  into  close  connection 
with  ver.  8.  Here  it  is  declared  that  the  misera- 
ble condition  described  in  ver.  8,  is  the  conse- 
quence of  starvation;  and  at  the  same  time,  the 
reflection  is  made  that  death  by  hunger  is  inore 
dreadful  than  death  by  the  sword. — They  that 
be  slain  v^ith  the  sv7ord,  are  better  than 
they  i;hat  be  slain  with  hunger;  Happier 
are  they  who  arc  slain  by  the  sword,  than  they  who 
are  by  hunger  slain  \_Bappier  tvere  the  sla.n  by  the 
sword,  than  the  slain  by  the  famine.  Translating 
the  words  in  the  past  time,  removes  them  from 
the  category  of  a  moral  or  psychological  reflection, 
and  restores  the  harmony  of  the  style  as  a  poeti- 
cal description  of  actual  events.  It  reminds  us, 
too,  .that  the  nobles  suffered  from  the  sword,  as 
well  as  by  famine.  They  who  died  quickly  by 
means  of  the  sword  were  more  fortunate  than 
those  who  suffered  a  lingering  death  by  starva- 
tion. So  in  ver.  6,  the  Prophet  regards,  f^r 
similar  reasons,  the  destruction  of  Sodom  as  less. 


158 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


severe  and  terrible  than  that  of  Jerusalem. — 
W.  H.  H.] — For  these  pine  away — raarg., 
flow  out, — stricken  through  for  want  of  the 

fruits  of  the  field —  Who  pme  away  pierced  in  the 
heart  for  want  of  the  fruits  of  the  field.  Tliis  clause 
declares  two  things  in  reference  to  those  slain  by 

the  sword  (3|^n  '''^vn),  and  those  slain  by  hunger 
Oi'1  '"^Sni,  one  in  which  they  agree,  and  one  in 
which  they  differ.  1.  That  wherein  they  agree ; 
they  are  both  pierced  through  (C^j^^?).  2. 
That  wherein  they  differ;  those  that  starve,  me/i 
away,  that  is  to  say,  they  die  slowly,  whilst  with 
the  others,  death  is  quickly  over. 

[The  Versions  and  commentators  accept  gene- 
rally the  translation  given  above  of  the  last  clause 
of  this  verse.  Yet  there  are  serious  objections 
to  it,  and  cogent  reasons  for  adopting  a  difi'erent 
rendering.  1.  It  is  taken  for  granted  that  the  rela- 
tive DHK'  must  refer  to  the  last  subject  mentioned, 
those  slain  or  killed,  by  hunger.  It  is  more  gram- 
matical to  refer  it  to  the  principal  subject  of  the 
preceding  clause,  which  is  those  slain  by  the  sword, 
regarding  the  sentence  as  only  begun  in  the  first 
clause  and  finished  in  the  second.     The  words 

3J^T  wSnO,  than  those  killed  by  famine,  could  be 
transposed  to  the  end  of  the  verse  without  chang- 
ing the  grammatical  construction  in  the  least, 
(though  it  would  mar  the  rhythm  and  the  poeti- 
cal paronomasia),  and  this  shows  that  they  are 
entirely  subordinate  to  the  main  idea.  2.  A 
meaning  is  forced  upon  the  verb  3^T,  of  melting 
or  pining  away,  as  descriptive  of  a  slow  death, 
which  it  has  in  no  other  place  in  Scripture.  In 
tlie  only  place  where  it  has  been  supposed  to  have 
the  meaning  of  dissolving,  Jer.  xlix.  4,  Dr.  Nae- 
GKLSBACH  himself  says  it  has  not  that  sense  (see 
gram,  note  above),  and  if  it  has,  it  would  imply 
rather  a  sudden,  mysterious  disappearance,  than 
a  slow  and  prolonged  dissolution.  The  aflBnity 
between  the  Latin  words  tabescere  and  liquescere, 
brought  forward  by  Pareau,  and  confirmed  by 
a  quotation  from  .Seneca,  which  has  been  re- 
peated by  nearly  every  commentator  since,  even 
last  of  all  by  Gerlach,  is  of  no  force  whatever; 
not  only  because  the  usage  of  Latin  thought  and 
expression  is  of  no  authority  in  Hebrew ;  but 
because  liquescere,  the  fundamental  idea  of  which 
is  to  become  liquid,  to  melt,  has  a  natural  affinity 
to  tabescere,  to  melt  gradually,  be  dissolved  n.nd  hence, 
metaphorically,  to  waste  or  pine  away,  while  H^T, 
the  fundamental  idea  of  which  is  \o  flow  out  or 
gush  out,  has  no  natural  affinity  to  3NT,  even  if 
tlie  fundamental  idea  of  3N1  is  to  melt,  and  cer- 
tainly no  affinity  to  3XT  in  the  only  senses  in 
which  it  is  used  in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  of  pining 
away,  or  being  distressed  with  sorrow  or  fear.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  only  sense  in  which  the  word 
31t  is  elsewhere  used,  as  when  it  is  applied  to  the 
sudden  and  violent  gushing  out,  or  rapid  overflow- 
ing of  water,  see  Ps.  Ixxviii.  20 ;  cv.  41  ;  Is.  xlviii. 
21;  Ex.  iii.  8,  admirably  describes  the  death  of 
those  whose  Wves  flowed  atvug  as  the  blood  gushed 
from  their  hearts,  pierced  with  a  sword.  3.  The 
fufuro  form  of  the  verb  Or,  is  entirely  ignored. 
It  may  be  difficidt,  with  our  different  modes  of 
thougut,  always  to  detect  the  purport  of  a  change 


in  the  Hebrew  tenses,  but  it  is  quite  certain  tha 
these  changes  are  never  purposeless;  and  here, 
where  a  future  is  suddenly  thrust  in  Hiiunig  pre- 
terite tenses,  it  must  have  an  import  am  bearing 
upon  the  meaning  intended.  What  the  force  of 
the  future  here  is,  depends  on  the  subject  of  the 
relative  and  of  the  verb.  If  that  sutject  is  those 
slain  by  the  famine,  3^"^  '77n,  then  the  future 
may  have  an  optative  sense;  these  tvould  have 
flowed  out  having  been  pierced,  i.  e.,  they  would  have 
preferred  to  die  by  the  sword.  But  if,  as  is  more 
likely,  the  subject  is  those  slain  by  the  sword, 
J^ri'w/n,  then  the  future  has  the  sense  in  which 
Jeremiah  so  often  uses  it,  of  the  historical  im- 
perfect, and  then,  too,  the  relative  DHii',  has  its 
more  proper  sense  of  those  who;  Happier  ivere 
those  slain  by  the  sivord — those  ivho  gushed  out  having 
/jeen pierced,  i.e.,  who  died  instantly  as  the  blood 
gushed  out  of  their  hearts.  4.  A  metaphorical 
meaning  is  thrust  u^jon  D'")plO=6ewi^  or  having 
been  pierced,  which  the  word  can  hardly  bear, 
namely,  pierced  with  the  sharp  pains  of  hunger.  The 
word  is  only  used  of  being  pierced  through  bodily 
with  some  sharp  weapon,  as  a  sword  or  spear.  It 
is  never  used  metaphorically,  not  eveninZech.  xii. 
10;  xiii.  3,  which  have  been  appealed  to  ;  nor  yet 
in  Prov.  xii.  18,  where  the  piercings  of  a  sivord  are 
compared  to  wounds  inflicted  by  a  wicked  tongue, 
for  even  there  the  word  derived  from  our  verb  is 
used  in  the  literal  sense  of  bodily  piercings,  made 
by  a  sword.  The  word  might,  it  is  true,  in  our 
text,  be  an  instance  of  bold,  audacious  metaphor. 
But  when  there  are  so  many  other  reasons  for 
taking  it  in  its  literal  sense,  we  may  spare  our- 
selves the  task  of  justifying  a  metaphorical  one. 
5.  The  preposition  jD,  is  taken  in  an  unusual 
sense.  Calvin  and  others  construe  it  blindly, — 
pierced  through  by  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  and  ex- 
plain '-that  all  the  productions  of  the  earth  took 
vengeance  on  this  wicked  people,  by  refusing  the 
usual  supply."  This  is  too  extraordinary  a 
personification  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth  to  be  al- 
lowable, and  it  is  a  strange  thing  to  charge  a 
crime  on  an  agent  that  has  no  existence.  We 
would  rather  adopt  the  opinion  of  Jarchi  who 
explained  that  their  death  was  caused  by  the 
weeds  and  roots  with  which,  in  their  hunger  they  had 
filled  themselves,  though  it  is  something  new  to 
call  weeds  and  roots,  fruits  of  the  earth.  The  usual 
explanation  is,  that  they  died /or  want  of  the  fruits 
of  the  earth.  It  is  doubtful  if  |p  can  be  explained 
in  any  such  sense,  as  Dr.  Naegelsbach  seems  to 
concede,  when  he  says  it  can  only  be  taken  in 
the  sense  of  away,  far  from,  without.  There  is  less 
difficulty  with  this  word,  if  we  understand  the 
clause  in  the  sense  expressed  by  the  Septuagint, 
tTTopev^r/aav  EKKEKEVTrjiievoi  anb  yEvvrjiidruv  aypuv, 
I  key  were  driven  away,  having  been  pierced,  from  the 
fruitful  fields.  So  Chaldieus:  '' Those  fled  away, 
when  they  were  pierced,  from  the  products  and  fruits 
of  the  field,  i.  e.,  they  were  full  and  satisfied,  since 
they  were  pierced  when  their  bellies  were  full  of 
food;"  and  J.  D.  Michaelis,  ''who,  suddenly 
pierced,  forsook  the  rich  fruits  of  the  earth  (on  which 
they  dwelt)."  This  explanation  really  contains 
the  idea  expressed  by  Bi.ayney's  translation, 
"tiiose,  being  thrust  through, pass  away  before  the 
fruits  of  the  field,   i.  e.,  they   pass   away  at   one 


CHAP.  IV.  11. 


15.\ 


stroke,  before  the  means  of  subsistence  fail,  and 
so  experience  not  the  misery  of  wanting  them." 
Dathe  supposes  a  direct  comparison  between  the 
suJdeuness  of  their  death  and  the  proverbial 
withering  of  the  grass.  "  Quicker  yet  than  the 
mown  grass,  they  vanished  who  were  pierced 
with  the  sword."  This  idea  of  their  dying  be- 
fore tiie  famine  came,  throws  additional  light  on 
the  use  of  the  future  tense  in  O.T',  lit.,  they  loere 
gushing  forth  from  the  fruits  of  the  field.     The  last 


clause  of  the  verse  is  a  more  specific  statement 
of  what  is  said  in  the  first  clause.  Happier  were 
those  who  fell  by  the  sword,  than  those  who 
starved  to  death,  especially  those  who  being 
pierced  through,  died  while  yet  there  were  sup- 
plies of  food  in  the  city.  This  is  the  idea  I  have 
endeavored  to  express  in  the  new  translation. 
Boothroyd's  translation — For  those  pierced  past 
away,  but  these  for  want  of  the  fruits  of  the  field, 
would  require  a  new  text. — W.  H.  H.] 


IV.  10. 

10      The  hands  of  the  pitiful  women  have  sodden  their  own  children :  they  were  their 
meat  in  the  destruction  of  the  daughter  of  my  people. 

TEXTUAL    AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  10.— 'jorr^  (spe  EwALD,  §  164,  a ;  Olsh.,  p.  412,/)  is  air.  Aty.  According  to  the  sense  it  seems  to  denote,  not  the 
external  habits  of  lite,  as  T\3'\  and  T\yi^  (Deut.  xxviii.  56),  but  the  inner  habitus,  softness  and  tenderness  of  feeling.  The 
etymology  favors  this,  ser-  D'OTTI  and  Din"!-— The  verb  7tl?3  does  not  occur  in  Jeremiah. — "[')''  is  found  in  Jeremiah  once, 
xxxi.  20.— nn?..  according  to  Fuerst,  a  secondary  form  of  r\'t'\2,  Ps.  Ixix.  22  (Olsh.,  p.  417),  is  found  only  here.  More 
properly  it  should  be  taken,  with  Ewald  (see  §  165  c),  Maurer,  Olshausen,  for  the  Inf.  Piel,  see  fl  w3'7,  "IJt'^S  DTI.  Is. 
Yi.  l-"? ;  Ps.  xlix.  15.— The  form  1:07  Jeremiah  never  uses.— *^1   "13t!/3-  See  ii.  11. 


KXEGETICAL   AND    CRITICAL. 

Ver.  10.  This  verse  exactly  corresponds,  with 
respect  to  its  subject,  to  vers.  3-5,  and  consti- 
tutes in  relation  to  those  verses  a  climax.  For 
whilst  vers.  3-5  speak  of  the  pining  away  of  the 
children,  here  the  yet  more  terrible  fact  is  told 
that  mothers  consumed  tlieir  own  children. — 
The  hands  of  the  pitiful  vromen  have 
sodden  their  own  children.  The  hands  of 
tender-hearted   women   cooked   their   oivn   children. 


They  •were  their  meat  in  the  destruction 

■ — thei/  were  food  for  them  in  the  ruin — of  the 
daughter  of  My  people.  The  Poet  would 
say,  that  the  complication  of  feelings  and  sensa- 
tions, caused  by  their  terrible  calamity,  hurried 
away  even  tender-hearted  women  to  the  commis- 
sion of  this  most  horrible  crime.  See  ii.  20. 
[Henderson:  "Compare  2  Kings  vi.  28,  29; 
Lev.  xxvi.  29;  Deut.  xxviii.  56,  67.  For  a  most 
graphic  description  of  such  a  horrible  scene,  see 
JosEPHUs'  account  of  the  siege  under  Titus, 
Bell.  Jud.  cap.  X.  9."] 


IV.  11. 

11       The  Lord  hath  accomplished  his  fury ;  he  hath  poured  out  his  fierce  anger,  and 
hath  kindled  a  fire  in  Ziou,  and  it  hath  devoured  the  foundations  thereof. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  11.- n73.  Jer.  ix.  15  ;  xiv.  12  ;  xxvi.  8,  dc.  See  ii.  22.— 'ir\nn,  see  ii.  4.— i3X  1^11,  see  i.  12.— HiT'.  All  exist- 
ing forms  of  this  root  are  Tery  frequent  with  Jeremiah,  ii,  15;  ix.  9,  11 ;  xvii.  27,  etc. — HIQ^  Jeremiah  never  uses.  See  Ea. 
XXX.  4;  xiii.  14;  Am.  i.  4,  7, 10;  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7,  e<c. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  11.  This  verse  closes  the  second  part  of 
the  Poem,  in  a  way  entirely  similar  to  that  in 
which  ver.  6  closes  the  first  part.  In  both  there 
is  placed  in  our  hand,  as  it  were,  a  measuring 
rule,  that  we  may  be  able  to  measure  the  extent 
and  the  significance  of  t\ie  catastrophe  which  has 
befallen  Zion.  Only  in  ver.  6  is  indicated  the 
measure    of  the    greatness    of  Zion's  guilt,  but 


here  the  measure  of  the  Divine  wrath.  [The 
remarkable  correspondence  between  vers.  1-6 
and  7-11,  which  Dr.  Naegelsbach  has  so  skil- 
fully developed,  is  argument  enough  for  reject- 
ing the  arrangement  of  Gerlacii,  who  assigns 
ver.  11  to  the  second  general  division  of  the 
Poem.— W.  H.  H.].— The  LORD  hath  ac- 
complished his  fury  ;  he  hath  poured  out 
his  fierce  anger,  and  hath  kindled  a  fire 
in  Zion.  and  it  hath  devoured  the  founda- 
tions thereof.     Jehovah  fulfitled  His  wrath,  Ha 


160 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


poured  out  (die  Glut  seines  Zornes)  His  hot  anger, 
and  kindled  afire  in  Zion  that  consumed  her  founda- 
tions.  [Gerlach  remarks  that  the  foundations 
of  the  city  were  not  literally  destroyed,  but  that 
this  denotes  in  a  general  way  that  the  city  was 
razed  to  the  ground.  This  is  explicitly  said  of 
Zion,  or  the  sacred  part  of  the  city,  with  special 
reference  to  the  Sanctuary,  which  was  completely 
destroyed.     See  Deut.  xxsii.  22 ;  Jer.  xxi.  14 ; 


vii.  20.  We  may  regard  this  as  a  prophecy  of  a 
future  destruction  that  was  to  come  on  Zion, 
when  not  one  stone  should  be  left  upon  another; 
or,  if  not  a  prophecy,  at  least  an  instructive 
commentary  on  the  causes  which  led  to  that 
catastrophe,  and  on  the  catastrophe  itself  as  the 
result  of  the  wrath  and  fiery  indignation  of 
Jehovah  God,  accomplishing  the  threatening  of 
His  holy  word.— W.  H.  H.] 


PART  II.— IV.  12-22. 
Sect.  III.  Vees.  12-16. 


h 


Ver,  12.  The  kings  of  the  earth  believed  not, 

Nor  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth, 
That  an  oppressor  and  enemy  would  come 
Into  Jerusalem's  gates. 
0  Ver.  13.  On  account  of  the  sins  of  her  Prophets, 
The  crimes  of  her  Priests, 
Who  shed  in  the  midst  of  her 
Blood  of  the  righteous. 
^  Ver.  14.  They  stumbled  like  blind  men  through  the  streets, 
Defiled  with  blood 
So  that  men  could  not 
Touch  their  garments. 
D  Ver.  15.  "Away !  unclean !  "  men  cried  to  them,  "  away !  away  I  touch  not!" 
When  they  fled  away,  they  still  stumbled. 
Men  said  among  the  heathen, 
"  They  shall  not  longer  tarry." 
5  Ver.  16.  The  anger  of  Jehovah  scattered  them  ; 
He  will  no  longer  look  upon  them. 
Men  showed  no  favor  to  priests, 

They  had  no  compassion  for  elders. 

Sect.  IV.  Vers.  17-22. 

^  Ver.  17.  As  for  us,  our  eyes  failed,  still  looking 
For  our  vain  help : 
On  our  watch-tower  we  watched 
For  a  people  that  could  not  save. 
^f  Ver.  18.  They  hunted  our  steps 

That  we  could  not  go  in  our  streets. 
Our  end  drew  near,  our  days  were  fulfilled. 
Yea,  our  end  was  come  I 
15  Ver.  19.  Swifter  were  our  pursuers 

Than  the  eagles  of  heaven : 
On  the  mountains,  they  chased  us  ; 

In  the  wilderness,  they  lay  in  wait  for  us. 
n  Ver.  20.  The  breath  of  our  nostrils,  the  Anointed  of  Jehovah, 
Was  taken  in  their  jjits, 
Of  whom  Ave  said. 

Under  his  shadow  will  we  live  among  the  nations. 

B'  Ver.  21.  Exult  and  be  glad,  daughter  of  Edom, 
That  dwellest  in  the  land  of  Uz, 
To  thee,  also,  sliall  the  cup  pass  over, 

Thou  shalt  be  drunk  and  make  thyself  naked. 


CHAP.  IV.   12-16.  161 


n  Ver.  22.  Consumed  is  thy  guilt,  daughter  of  Zion, 
No  longer  does  He  make  thee  captive. 
He  visits  thy  guilt,  daughter  of  Edom, 
He  uncovers  thy  sins. 

ANALYSIS. 

Part  third,  vers.  12-16,  treats  of  the  causes  of  the  terrible  catastrophe.  What  even  the  heathen  had  not 
deemed  possible,  ver.  12,  had  been  brought  about  by  the  sins  of  the  prophets  andpriests,  especially  by  their 
blood-guiltiness,  ver.  18,  in  consequence  of  which  they  had  been  proscribed  by  their  oivn  countrymen,  and 
not  only  so,  but  even  in  foreign  countries  they  had  been  chased  from  place  to  place,  and  scattered  and 
treated  in  the  worst  manner,  without  respect  to  age  or  condition,  vers.  14-16.  Part  fourth  describes 
the  failure  of  the  hope  resting  on  Egyptian  help,  ver.  17  ;  for  the  Chaldeans,  in  order  to  prevent  the 
flight  of  the  king,  kept  the  most  careful  watch,  whereby  this  means  of  escape  was  prevented,  ver.  18; 
ivhen,  nevertheless,  the  flight  was  at  last  attempted  and  frustrated  by  the  rapid  pursuit,  the  only  hope 
the  fugitives  still  cherished,  to  be  able  to  live  among  a  foreign  people,  in  the  enjoyment  of  freedom,  at 
least,  under  the  shadow  of  their  oum  king,  was  destroyed,  vers.  19,  20.  The  last  two  verses,  21,  22 
which  constitute  the  conclusion  of  the  whole,  contain  a  short  address  to  Edom,  lohich,  on  account  of  its 
malevolent  joy  at  the  downfall  of  Zion,  is  forewarned  of  a  similar  fate,  whilst  in  the  same  connection, 
the  prospect  is  exhibited  to  Zion  of  the  remission  of  her  guilt  and  an  end  of  her  captivity. 

Vers.  12-16.  This  third  part  contains  an  exposition  of  the  causes  of  the  punishment  inflicted.  What  had 
been  regarded,  even  among  the  heathen,  as  impossible,  namely,  that  the  gates  of  Jerusalem  should  be 
entered  by  force,  ver.  12,  this  the  godless  priests  and  prophets,  by  their  bloody  cruelty,  had  rendered 
possible,  ver.  13.  Thus  they  became  an  object  of  abhorrence  to  Israel  and  to  the  heathen,  vers.  14, 
15,  so  that,  tolerated  nowhere,  they  were  scattered  abroad  and  compelled  to  suffer  the  hardest  of  fates, 
ver.  16. 

IV.  12-16. 

12  The  kings  of  the  earth,  and  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  world,  would  not  have 
believed  that  the  adversary  and  the  enemy  should  have  entered  into  the  gates  of 

13  Jerusalem.     For  the  sins  of  her  prophets  and  the  iniquities  of  her  priests  that  have 

14  shed  the  blood  of  the  just  in  the  midst  of  her.  They  have  wandered  as  blind  men 
in  the  streets,  they  have  polluted  themselves  with  blood,  so  that  men  could  not 

15  touch  their  garments.  They  cried  unto  them,  Depart  ye  ;  it  is  unclean ;  depart, 
depart,  touch  not :  when  they  fled  away  and  wandered,  they  said  among  the  heathen, 

16  They  shall  no  more  sojourn  there.  The  anger  of  the  Lord  hath  divided  them ;  he 
will  no  more  regard  them :  they  respected  not  the  persons  of  the  priests,  they 
favoured  not  the  elders. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  12.— The  Hiphil  of  jOX,  once  in  Jeremiah,  xii.  6.— V-IX-^Sd,  Jer.  xxv.  20.— [Si)1.     The  %  omitted  by  K'ri,  and 

by  some  MSS.  and  Masoretic  editions,  and  by  Sept.,  is  expressed  in  Syr.,  Chald.  and  Vulg.    Blatnet]. —  73n  is  found  in 

Jeremiah  only  in  the  critically  suspected  passages  x.  12 ;  li.  15.    The  phrase  73n    ''^VJ''     i3  is  found  verbatim  Ps.  xxxiii. 

8,  comp.  xxiv.  1 ;  xeviii.  7.— Jeremiah   never  uses  *1V  in  the  singular,  seei.  5,  7,  10.     iy  is  used  in  connection  with  ^'IX, 

as  here,  in  Esth.  vii.  6.— □Sij/lT'  '"'^V'^,  Jer.  i.  15 ;  xvii.  19,  21,  27 ;  xxii.  19. 
TT      :      ■■^^-.[- 
Ver.  13.— n3"lp3.     See  Jer.  iv.  14;  vi.  6  ;  etc.,  and  remarks  on  Lam.  iii.45. — The  expression,  D''p'''^V  D'l,  occurs  only 

here:  elsewhere  it  is  always  said   'pj  m,  e.  p'.  Deut.  xxi.  8 ;  2  Kings  xxiv.  4,  or  'pjn  m,  Jer.  xxii.  17,  or  D'PJ  D'l. 

I-T      T  |-T-       -  -I-: 

Jer.  xix.  4. 

Ver.  14. — Jeremiah  uses  _yij  once,  xiv.  10.  See  Zeph.  i.  17. — "l^^^,  once  in  Jer.,  xxxi.  8.  [Blaynet  and  Owen  taks 
0'^1^»  as  participle  Pual  of  I^Jf  to  rouse  or  excite.}— r^VH^T^^-  See  vers.  5,  8.— D13  iSxjj-  The  words  are  taken  ftom 
Is.  lix.  3.  7XJ,  softened  from  7j;i|  (Lev.  xxvi.  11, 15 ;  Jer.  xiv.  19).  With  reference  to  form,  blended  of  Niphal  and  Pual, 
see  Olsh.  g  275,  Ewald,  §  132,  &.,  Deutzsch,  Is.  p.  5G6  [Green's  Gr.,  exceedingly  defiled,  §  83,  c.  2,  J  122,  2].  ^XJ  is  found 
in  Jeremiah  only  in  the  sense  of  loosening,  rede.eming  ;  see  iii.  58. — The  construction  of  17JV  with  the  finite  verb  is  equi- 
valent to  the  same  witli  the  Infinitive,  i.  14.  See  iii.  3,  5;  Esth.  viii.  6;  my  Crr.  §  95,  g.  rem.  j2^  is  frequent  in  Jeremiah, 
■ee  iii.  5 ;  xviii.  6 ;  xx.  7,  etc. — J?  J  J  in  Jeremiah,  iv.  10,  18 ;  xii.  14,  etc. — ty-IJ  7,  Jer.  x.  9. 

Ver.  15. — T^D  'D  Jeremiah,  v.  23;  xv.  5,  etc. — ?*?3£D  in  the  Singular,  never  in  Jeremiah  :  he  uses  only  once  CXDCSn, 

■'  T  .  ..  .  _ 

xix.  13.    [If  he  could  use  the  plural  only  once,  why  not  the  shigular  only  once? — W.  H.  II.] — In  the  words  mo  !|T?D 

^yjn~7X  the  Poet  seems  to  have  in  mind  Is.  Hi.  11,  where  the  same  words  are  used,  only  they  are  addressed,  not  to  the 

T  •  T 

unclean,  but  to  the  clean.— V^J  (kindred  to  %"|J,  Q^J,  but  occurring  in  this  signification  only  here)  is  not  fovmd  in  Jere- 
Biah.    [Oerlach  derives  li'J  from  rii'J,  which  Jeremiah  does  use  in  its  Aramaic  form,  and  in  same  sense  as  here,  Jer. 

T  TT 

n 


162 


THE  LAxMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


slriii.  9. — W.  H.  H.]— ^WJ-Ql  see  !|>{1~DJ,  Ps.  xcv.  9. — Jeromiah  uses  ^^J  frequently  m  chs.  xlii.-xliv.  (see  xlii.  15, 17 

■'t       -  t      - 

22,  etc.) — Hiphil  fl'Dlil  is  fouiul  in  tin-  P  ophet  only  once,  xxxi.  12,  whilst  it  occurs  in  this  chapter  three  times,  vers. 

1.5,  16,  22. 

Ver.  16. — p7n  (Hiphil  occurs  in  Jeremiah  only  once  in  a  passage  critically  lioubtful,  xxxvii.  12)  is  to  scatter,  as  Gen. 

xlix.  7.     With  ri^gard  to  its  singular  number,  see   my  Gr.  g  105,  6. — •1"'DV,  see  ver.  15. — D'SH,  see  i.  11. — The  phrase 

D'J3  aU},  elsewhere  very  freqiicijtly  (see  Dout.  x.  17  ;  2  Kings  v.  1 ;  Job  xiii.  10;  Ps.  Ixxxii.  2;  Prov.  xviii.  5  ;  Is.  iii.  3; 

•  T        T  T 

Mal.  ii.  9;  comp.  Lam.  v.  12),  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah. — Of  Tjn  Jeremiah  uses  the  Niphal  only  once,  xxii.  23. 


EXEGETTCAL  AND  CRITICAL, 

Ver.  12  skilfully  introduces  the  exposition  of 
the  causes  of  what  had  happened,  since  the  pre- 
sumption, entertained  even  by  the  heathen,  that 
it  was  impossible  for  any  human  enemy  to  take 
Jerusalem  by  force,  was  disproved  (zur  Folie- 
gegeben  wird)  by  the  sad  reality. — The  kings 
of  the  earth,  and  all  the  inhabitants  of 
the  v7orld,  would  not  have  believed — had 
not  believed — that  the  adversary  and  the 
enemy  should  have  entered — that  an  op- 
pressor and  enemy  would  come — into  the  gates 
of  Jerusalem.  It  is  clear  that  this  verse  con- 
tains a  hyperbole.  For  Jerusalem  had  been 
captured  more  than  once  before  the  days  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar (see  1  Kings  xiv.  26;  2  Kings  xiv. 
13,  14;  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  11;  2  Kings  xxiii.  33- 
35).  In  spite  of  this  fact,  the  opinion  that  it 
could  not  be  taken  by  force  may  have  prevailed 
among  the  heathen,  but  hardly  to  the  extent 
which  the  Poet  here  seems  to  ascribe  to  it.  [Not 
only  was  Jerusalem  regarded  as  well-nigh  im- 
pregnable, because  it  was  strongly  fortitied  by 
nature  and  art ;  but  there  was  a  prevailing  senti- 
ment among  men  that  it  was  under  the  special 
protection  of  the  Almighty.  The  heathen  idola- 
ters knew  to  their  cost  that  the  God  whom  the 
Jews  worshipped  was  a  God  of  great  power. 
They  believed  that  the  city  of  Jerusalem  and  its 
Temple  were  under  the  special  protection  of  that 
God.  The  discomfiture  of  Sennac'ierib's  army 
in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  at  the  very  gates  of  Je- 
rusalem, and  the  prolonged  siege  of  the  city  by 
the  armies  of  Nebuchaflnezzar,  were  well  calcu- 
lated to  deepen  the  impression  that  the  God  of 
the  Jews  would  not  suffer  the  city  to  be  taken. 
To  this  sentiment  the  Prophet  here  refers.  What 
he  says  is  pregnant  and  inferential.  He  assumes 
that  to  be  true,  which  even  the  heathen  believed, 
that  the  city  cotild  not  be  taken  unless  God  gave 
it  up  to  destruction.  God's  giving  it  up  to  de- 
struction implied  that  the  city  was  guilty  of  great 
and  heinous  sins;  and  without  pausing  to  state 
an  inference  so  patent,  the  Prophet  proceeds  at 
once  to  specify  the  particular  sins  which  led  to  a 
catastrophe  that  had  astonished  the  kings  of  the 
earth  and  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  tcorld.  He 
thus  condenses  several  thoughts  into  one  ex- 
pression;— what  even  heathen  had  not  expected 
had  happened,  and  was  evidence  to  all  the  world 
of  the  horrible  wickedness,  which  must  have 
provoked  God  to  forsake  His  people!  There  is 
no  reason,  therefore,  for  the  suspicion  that  the 
Prophet  indulged  in  poetical  exaggeration,  even 
if  "Jerusalem  had  been  cnpturcd  more  than 
once  bi'fme  the  days  of  Ni-buchadnezzar."  In 
point  of  tact,  however,  this  last  assertion  may  be 
questioned.     There  is  no  clear  evidence  that  Je- 


rusalem had  ever  before  fallen  into  actual  posses- 
sion of  a  heathen  enemy.  There  is  no  evidence 
at  all  that  it  had  ever  been  taken  by  assault.  On 
the  occasions  referred  to  in  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  11 
and  2  Kings  xxiii.  33-35,  it  does  not  appear  that 
the  city  of  Jerusalem  was  actually  occupied  by 
the  enemy,  or  even  visited  by  them,  and  there  is 
no  intimation  whatever  of  its  being  ait.icked  and 
taken  by  arms.  From  the  account  given  in  2 
Chron.  xii.  4-9,  we  would  infer  that  Rehoboam 
bought  peace  by  giving  up  the  treasures  of  the 
city:  and  that  if  he  surrendered  the  city  at  all, 
he  did  so  without  waiting  for  battle.  Josephus 
declares  that  Shishak  took  the  city  without  fight- 
ing (Ant.  B.  viii.  ch.  x.  §  3) — and  that  this  was 
the  only  time  it  ever  was  taken  before  Nebuchad- 
nezzar (Jewish  War,  B.  vi.  ch.  x.  §  1).  But 
there  is  no  positive  evidence  that  the  Egyptians 
actually  took  possession  of  the  city.  The  account 
of  the  invasion  of  Jmlah  by  the  Philistines  and 
Arabians,  2  Chron.  xxi.  16,  17,  is  very  brief  and 
vague.  If  the  king's  house  which  they  rifled, 
was  the  palace  in  Jerusalem,  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  whole  city  fell  into  their  possession,  or 
that  it  was  taken  by  assault.  Joash,  king  of  Is- 
rael, 2  Chron.  xxv.  21-24,  undoubtedly  took 
possession  of  the  city  and  dismantled  and  de- 
stroyed its  defences.  But  Joash  was  not  a  hea- 
then king,  neither  did  he  take  the  city  by  assault. 
Having  already  defeated  the  armies  of  Judah  in 
the  field,  he  seems  to  have  met  with  no  resist- 
ance at  all  before  the  walls  of  Jerusalem. — 
W.  H.  II.] 

Ver.  13.  EwALD  takes  vers.  12,  13,  as  a  ques- 
tion. Would  the  kings  of  the  earth  ....  believe, 
that  the  enemy  and  oppressor  had  entered  the 
gates  of  Jeiusalem  only  on  account  of  the  sins 
of  her  prophets  ....  who  shed  blood  ....  in 
the  midst  of  her ?     The  objections  to   this  are: 

1.  The  negative  particle,  Vh,  ver.  12,  is  not  the 
same  as  the  interrogative  particle   H.     Should 

we  take  it  as  intended  for  J<7n=is  not,  an  af- 
firmative answer  would  be  expected.  2.  Ewald 
is  obliged  to  insert,  between  vers.  12,  13,  an 
only  which  is  not  in  the  text,  for  he  perceives 
that  the  heathen  might  be  shaken  in  the  opinion 
referred  to,  by  a  general  apostacy  of  the  people, 
but  not  by  the  apostacy  of  particular  individuals. 
— Meier  and  Kalkak,  on  the  other  hand,  con- 
nect vers.  13,  14,  and  take  the  verb  1^'J=:  they 
irandered,  in  ver.  14,  as  predicate  of  the  princi- 
pal proposition.  But  in  this  case  the  people 
must  be  regarded  as  the  subject,  which  contra- 
dicts the  whole  context.  We  must,  therefore, 
regard  ver.  13,  with  Thenius  and  most  others, 
as  an  exclamation;   or,  as  Maureb   does,  supply 

a  nxi  nn'n^r^^is  came  to  pasx,  after  ver.  13.— 
For — on    account   of — the    sins    of    her    prO' 


CHAP.  IV.  12-16. 


16S 


phets  and  [there  is  no  conjunction  in  the 
Heb.]  the  iniquities  of  her  priests,  that 
have  shed  the  blood  of  the  just  in  the 
midst  of  her.  See  Jer.  xxvi.  7-24,  where  it  is 
manifest  that  the  chief  guilt  of  the  blood  of  the 
martyrs  rested  on  the  priests  and  prophets. 
Compare  Jer.  vi.  13-15;  xxiii.  11-15,  with  ii. 
34;  vii.  6;  xix.  4;  xxii.  3,  17;  Ez.  xxii.  25-29; 
2  Chron.  xxxvi.  14.  [Gataker:  "Not  that  the 
people  were  not  faulty,  as  well  as  either  of  these, 
in  those  wicked  pranks  and  practices  that  were 
then  committed;  but  that  these  were  foremost 
and  forwardest  ring-leaders  and  encouragers  of 
them  unto  those  wicked  courses,  which  they 
■should  have  reproved  in  them,  and  from  which 
they  should  have  endeavored  to  restrain  them." 
Calvin:  "He  mentions  one  kind  of  sins,  that 
they  shed  the  blood  of  the  righteous  in  the  midst  of 
Jerusalem.  They  had  no  doubt  led  the  people 
astray  in  other  things,  for  they  flattered  their 
vices  and  gave  loose  reins  to  licentiousness;  but 
the  Prophet  here  fixed  on  one  particular  sin,  the 
most  grievous;  for  they  had  not  only,  by  their 
errors  and  false  doctrines  and  flatteries,  led  away 
the  people  from  the  fear  of  God,  but  had  also 
obstinately  defended  their  impiety,  and  by  force 
and  cruelty  repressed  their  faithful  teachers, 
and  put  to  death  the  witnesses  of  God;  for  by 
the  righteous  or  just  he  no  doubt  means  the  pro- 
phets. For  what  Jerome  and  others  say,  that 
blood  had  been  shed  because  false  teachers  draw 
souls  to  perdition,  is  frivolous  and  wholly  fo- 
reign to  what  Jeremiah  had  in  view;  for  the 
word  righteous  cannot  be  applied  to  those  misera- 
ble men  who  were  ensnared  to  their  own  ruin. 
Then  Jeremiah,  after  having  denounced  the  sin 
of  the  prophets  and  the  iniquity  of  the  priests, 
mentions  the  savage  cruelty  which  was  as  it 
were  the  summit  of  all  their  vices."] 

Ver.  14  They  have  -wandered  as  blind 
men  in  the  streets,  they  have  polluted 
themselves  vrith  blood.  Theij  staggered  as 
blind  {men)  through  the  streets,  defiled  ivith  blood. 
[Wandered.  The  verb  is  more  frequently  used 
in  the  sense  of  staggering,  reeling  (so  Gerlach), 
or  stumbling  (Broughtdn,  Noyes),  than  in  any 
other,  and  this  sense  is  very  appropriate  to  the 
uncertain  motion  of  biiiid  men,  who  are  not  much 
addicted  to  wandering  about  the  streets. — W.  H. 
H.]. — As  blind  men.  The  idea  cannot  be 
csedium  perpetrandarum  insatiabilicupiditate  occiecati 
[blinded  by  insatiable  desire  to  commit  mur- 
ders], as  RosENMUELLER  would  hiivc  it;  for  they 
have  in  fact  already  shed  blood  and  therefore  it  is 
added  that  they  were  defiled  with  blood.  Rather, 
they  are,  as  it  were,  drunk  with  the  blood  they 
have  already  shed,  and  in  this  drunkenness  they 
go  along  as  if  blind,  not  observing  whom  they 
may  chance  to  touch  with  their  blood-stained 
clothes. — So  that  men  could  not  (marg.  in 
that  they  could  not  but)  touch  their  garments 
— when  one  could  not   [«'.  e.  lawfully]    touch  their 

garments. — So  that  (Ewald,  Thenius).  N73 
cannot  be  so  rendered.  It  stands  before  the 
whole  negative  sentence,  as  before  a  single  word. 
This  pontence  contains  a  statement  on  the  sub- 
ject of  Levitical  cleanness,  with  respect  to  the 
uncleanness  they  contracted  by  the  contamina- 
tion referred  to.     Thus:  They  staggered  ...  in  a 


condition  in  which  it  was  not  lawful  for  any  one  to 
touch  them.  [Gerlach,  whose  explanation  agrees 
with  that  just  given,  except  that  for  no  sufficient 
reason  he  renders  the  verbs  in  the  present  tense, 
has  more  accurately  expressed  the  sense  of  the 
original,  than,  perhaps,  any  other  commentator. 
"According  to  the  whole  drift  of  the  chapter, 
which  describes  the  consequences  of  the  judg- 
ment with  respect  to  particular  classes  and  con- 
ditions of  the  people,  the  following  verses  present 
it  description  of  the  judgment  inflicted  on  the 
wicked  Prophets  and  Priests,  but  not  a  mere 
fragment  of  the  history  of  the  late  siege.  This 
opinion  is  confirmed  by  the  very  first  words  of 
ver.  14  {they  stagger  as  if  blind),  v/hicXi  denote  else- 
where, as  a  comparison  with  Deut.  xxviii.  28,  29; 
Jer.  xxiii.  12;  Isa.  xxix.  9;  lix.  10  shows,  the 
eff"ect  of  Divine  punishment.  *  *  The  Prophets 
and  Priests  should  be  the  eyes  of  the  people  : 
they  have  become  blind  and  stagger  about  help- 
lessly (rathlos  und  hiilflos)  as  blind  men  do; 
thus  has  God's  hand  smitten  them  on  account  of 
their  sins.  The  evil  marks  of  their  sins  they 
carried  about  with  them  openly,  so  that  all  the 
world  could  recognize  them  and  avoid  their  touch, 
lest  they  should  become  themselves  unclean." — 
Other  translations  and  interpretations  have  been 
given,  all  involving  great  difficulties.  Blatney's 
is  unique.  "  They  ran  frantic  through  the  streets, 
they  were  stained  tvith  blood ;  such  as  they  could  not 
overpower,  they  touched  their  clothes.  The  meaning 
is,  that  if  they  could  no  otherwise  harm  those 
they  met  with  in  the  streets,  they  defiled  them 
by  touching  their  garments."  This,  besides  the 
impossible  translations,  is  open  to  the  objection 
(that  may  be  made  to  Rosenmueller's  and 
I3oothrotd's  glosses,  who  represent  the  Prophets 
and  Priests,  blinded  by  passion,  seeking  for 
blood),  namely,  that  the  prophets  and  priests 
shed  the  blood  of  the  just,  "not  by  raving 
through  the  streets,  sword  in  hand,  but  in  a 
more  secret  way,  by  instigating  their  agents" 
'Noyes).— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver  15.  They  cried  unto  them.  Depart 
ye  (inarg.  ye  polluted) ;  it  is  unclean;  depart, 
depart,  touch  not: — Away!  unclean  one!  tliey 
cried  to  them, — away  !  away  !  toiich  not!  Who  calls 
I'^-ID  [=depart  ye,  begone,  or  away.']?  Not  the 
murderers,  as  is  evident  from  the  words  they 
cried  [('.  e.  men  cried'\  unto  them  [for  the  pronoun 
must  refer  to  the  murderers. — W.  H.  H.].  The- 
nius  thinks,  those  who  met  together  may  have 

called  out  thus  to  each  other.  But  107  (to  them) 
cannot  mean  one  another.  It  might,  indeed,  be 
taken  in  the  sense  of  de  iis  \_concerning  them'\,  as 
Pareau  prefers,  with  an  appeal  to  Ps.  iii.  3; 
Ixxxvii.  5,  etc.  But  then  the  second  half  of  the 
verse,  in  which  those  murderers  suddenly  appear 
as  fugitives,  is  deprived  of  its  appropriate  expla- 
nation. I  take  the  words  then  as  a  call  addressed 
to  the  murderers.  According  to  Lev.  xiii.  4.'i,  the 
lepers  were  required  to  call  out  to  those  meeting 
them,  i<0£3,  X0£3  ["unclean,  unclean!"].  The 
same  cry  is  here  addressed  to  those,  who,  with- 
out reflecting  on  their  uncleanness,  stagger  about 
on  the  streets,  as  if  blind,  amongst  those  walking 
there.  [Wordsworth  :  "  The  Priests  and  Pro- 
phets, who,  in  their  spiritual  pride,  formerly 
said  to   others,  '  Come    not   near  to    me  ;  1  an 


164 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


holier  than  thou '  (Is.  Ixv.  5),  shall  be  loathed 
by  others,  as  being  polluted  by  blood,  and  men 
shall  cry  to  them  tame!  tame!  [unclean!  unclean!) 
— words  which  the  leper  was  obliged  to  cry  out, 
in  order  to  keep  others  from  him  (Lev.  xiii.  45). 
The  singular  number  [miclean)  is  here  used,  in 
order  to  connect  the  words  with  that  cry  of  the 
leper"].  But  this  cry — 11-10 n^a^cay.'  depart 
ye! — is  addressed  to  them  most  urgently,  and 
so  I'epeatedly  that  they  recognize  themselves  as 
proscribed,  and — are  compelled  to  flee.  The 
threefold  repetition  of  mo,  away!  seems  to  me 
to  indicate,  that  not  merely  immediately  after 
the  murders,  but  persistently  all  contact  with 
them  as  with  unclean  persons  was  avoided. 
Thus  they  were,  as  was  said,  proscribed. — 
■When  they  fled  a-way  and  vyandered — 
when  they  had  fled  away  they  contitiued  fugitively 
wandering  about  [for]  they  said  among  the 
heathen,  They  shall  no  more  sojourn  there 
— it  was  said  among  the  heathen,  They  shall  not 
longer  tarry.  Now  that  they  had  fled,  yet  even 
in  a  foreign  land  they  found  no  rest.  Thenius, 
most  unnecessarily  and  very  awkwardly,  sup- 
poses a  flight  to  the  Chaldeans,  who  had  sepa- 
rated these  outlaws  without  afi'ording  them  a 
permanent  place  of  abode  (1'J)  and  carried  them 
away  into  captivity  to  various  dilFerent  places. 
But  those  enemies  of  Jeremiah,  who  hated  him 
so  bitterly  and  persecuted  him,  especially  on 
account  of  his  constant  admonition  to  submit 
themselves  to  the  Chaldeans  (see  Jer.  xxxvii., 
xxxviii.),  certainly  did  not  themselves  go  over  to 
the  Chaldeans.  Rather,  it  is  only  indicated  here, 
in  a  general  way,  that  those  outlaws  might  have 
fled  to  heathen  nations.  But  if  they  had,  the 
words  1J.*J  Dl  [also  they  wandered)  show  that  their 
Ji^J  [wandering)  did  not  end  with  their  ]*1J  [flight). 
If  they  had  fled,  also  they  tvandered  about,  that  is 
to  say,  if  they  on  their  flight,  after  manifold 
wanderings,  thought  that  they  had  found  at  some 
particular  place  a  secure  retreat,  then  men  said 
even  there  among  the  heathen,  they  shall  not  tarry 
longer.  They  are  then  driven  away  even  from 
there.  This  so  plainly  reminds  us  of  the  restless 
and  fugitive  wanderings  of  Cain,  the  first  mur- 
derer, that  we  take  for  granted  that  the  Poet 
had  Gen.  iv.  12-14  [-\T  pi)  in  his  mind.  [If  U'J 
in  ver.  14  means  they  staggered,  as  men  smitten  by 
God  with  judicial  blindness,  it  seems  necessary 
to  give  it  the  same  meaning  in  ver.  15.  The 
sense  is  explained  by  the  judicial  use  of  the 
word  as  expressive  of  God's  judgments  ;  see  ver. 
14.     Gerlach:   "  When  they  fl,ed  away,  they  have 


likewise  staggered  about,  which,  on  account  of  tht 
evident  reference  to  1J7J  [they  staggered)  in  ver 
14,  must  mean  that  they  staggered  about  as  help- 
lessly as  they  did  before  in  the  city ;  and  were 
avoided  in  the  same  way.  For  if  they  would 
escape  the  scorn  of  their  own  people  by  a  hasty 
departure  from  them,  yet  the  nations,  from  whom 
they  sought  a  hospitable  reception  (I'j),  would 
refuse  it  to  them.  Men  said.  Tlicy  shall  no 
longer  remain  as  guests;  see  b'  ii.  xxviii,  65, 
66:  'and  among  these  nations  shait  liiou  find 
no  ease,  neither  shall  the  sole  of  thy  foot  have 
rest.'"— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  16.  The  anger  (marg.  face)  of  the 
LORD  hath  divided  them — Jehovah' k  counte- 
nance has  scattered  them.  Thus  the  Poet  describes 
what  is  known  to  him  of  the  actual  condition  of 
those  outlaws,  in  consequence  of  their  banish- 
ment. They  could  not  even  remain  together, 
but  must  be  scattered.  By  the  expression 
the  face  of  Jehovah,  the  scattering  is  traced 
back  to  Jehovah  as  its  cause,  who  had  not  lost 
sight  of  them,  but  had  directed  upon  them  His 
countenance  inimically.  See  Ps.  xxxiv.  17  (16). 
[See  also  Lev.  xvii.  10;  Ps.  xxi.  10  (9).  In  the 
latter  passage  the  words  in  the  time  of  Thine 
anger,  are  literally  in  the  time  of  Thy  face.  There 
may  be  an  allusion  here  to  Jer.  xvi.  17,  18, 
"For  Mine  eyes  are  upon  all  their  ways:  they 
are  not  hid  from  My  face,  neither  is  their  ini- 
quity hid  from  Mine  eyes.  And  I  will  first  re- 
compense their  iniquity  and  their  sin  double." 
When  God  forgives  our  sins,  we  may  say,  "Thou 
hast  cast  all  my  sins  behind  Thy  back,"  Is. 
xxxviii.  17.  But  when  He  punishes  them,  we 
are  compelled  to  say,  "We  are  consumed  by 
Thine  anger,  and  by  Thy  wrath  are  we  troubled. 
Thou  hast  set  our  iniquities  before  Thee,  our  se- 
cret sins  in  the  light  of  Thy  countenance."  Ps. 
xc.  7,  8. — W.  H.  H.] — He  will  no  more  re- 
gard them.  The  verb  is  future,  ^'pV.  The 
Poet  predicts  for  the  scattered  ones,  that  there 
will  be  no  more  favorable  change  of  Jehovah's 
mind  towards  them. — They  respected  not 
the  persons  of  the  priests,  they  favoured 
not  the  elders.  The  priests  found  not  for- 
bearance, the  elders  found  no  compassion  [or,  we 
may  translate  more  literally  as  E.  V.  under- 
standing that  the  subject  of  the  verbs  are  the 
heathen,  or  men  generally ;  and  the  wicked 
murderous  priests  and  elders  are  the  objects  of 
the  verbs.  God  has  irretrievably  cast  them 
away;  and  men  scorn  and  injure  them. — 
W.  H.  H.]  Men  deal  with  them  without  regard 
to  their  condition  or  age. 


IV.  17-20. 

17  As  for  us,  our  eyes  as  yet  failed  for  our  vain  help :  in  our  watching  we  have 

18  watched  for  a  nation  that  could  not  save  us.     They  hunt  our  steps,  that  we  cannot 

19  go  in  our  streets:  our  end  is  near,  our  days  are  fulfilled  ;  for  our  end  is  come.  Our 
persecutor.-^  are  swifter  than  the  eagles  of  the  heaven :  they  pursued  us  upon  the 

20  niouutaiiis,  they  laid  wait  for  us  in  the  wilderness.  The  breath  of  our  nostrils,  the 
anointed  of  the  Lord,  was  taken  in  their  pits,  of  whom  we  said,  Under  his  shadow 
we  shall  live  amontr  the  heathen. 


CHAP.  IV.   17-20.  -  1G5 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  17. — ^y^1y  [K'rl,  Ijni^].    The  form  is  a  monstrosity.    For,  1.  -y\^  never  stands  in  the  plural  with  suffixes.    2. 

If  we  suppose  that  the  suffix  is  joined  to  Dm^,  then  it  should  be  written  ri'll^  orinm^'-    3-  The  suffix  form  nj'- 

is  entirely  abnormal.     The  only  possible  analogy  would  be  rUTTi^'U,  Ez.  i.  11,  according  to  which  nj'lil'  would  be  con- 

T|v    ■■    •  :  T    ■■  " 

tracted  from  rUTTniy.     But  on  what  does  the  plural  suffix  di-pend?     To  meet  this  difficulty  the  Masorites  read  IJ'Tiy. 

T|V     ■■ 

[So  Calvin,  while  we  were  yet  standing:  Blatney,  Henderson,  Owen,  while  yet  or  stiU  we  existed.  Blatnet  conjectures  thai 
the  final  H  "  is  a  corruption,  not  of  a  single  1,  but  of  two  11,  the  latter  of  which  ought  to  be  prefixed  to  n  J' /DH,  where  by 
its  conversive  force,  it  not  only  clears  the  passage  from  all  difficulty,  but  brings  the  text  into  a  perfect  agreement  with  the 
LXX.,  Syr.  and  Vulg.  Versions."]  But  here  also  the  difficulty  remains  that  the  suffix  would  be  joined  to  D"ni>'-  Ols- 
H^USEN  Q  222,  g.)  on  this  account  assumes  that  ^J'llJ?  stands  for  ^JHlJ?,  and  that  the  K'tib  is  the  result  of  an  error  in 
writing.  The  latter  seems  to  me  also  probable :  only  I  believe  that  the  feminine  ending  of  the  suffix  is  correct,  and  that 
the  '  before  HJ  was  occasioned  by  the  immediately  following  ny/DP-  The  word  then  had  the  sound  originally  of 
71]n'iy  (1  Kings  i.  22).    Him  17.  as  a  proposition,  with  a  predicate  to  be  supplied,  is  it  is  true  also  abnormal,  even  if  only 

TV  T  V 

the  idea  of  being  is  supplied.  Yet  the  sense  is  pertinent.  She,  that  is  to  say  Jerusalem,  still  stood.  We  may  refer  for  the 
grammatical  construction  to  Jer.  xl.  3.  [This  is  Rosenmueller's  explanation.  But  there  is  no  particular  reference  to  the 
city  in  the  whole  preceding  part  of  the  Song  ;  and  neither  the  city  nor  Zion  is  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  or  the  reader.  If 
then  we  adopt  the  reading  njmyt  the  explanation  of  Thenids  is  certainly  to  be  preferred,  "  Whilst  this  was  or  happened, 
— namely,  the  incident  just  related  with  reference  to  the  fugitives."  But  Gerlach  is  of  the  opinion  that  nj'-  can  be  taken 
as  suff.  Zpers.fem.plur.  referring  to  tlie  eyes.  He  refers  to  an  analogous  case  in  Ps.  Ixxiii.  5,  10^-  in  ID'J'X,  and  explains 
its  occurrence  here  as  influenced  by  sympathy  with  n^'Son  and  a  desire  to  distinguish  the  suffix  from  the  singular  form 
in  ^5^il^  l  Kings,  i.  22.  Then  the  translation  is  Yet  our  eyes  wasted  themselves  in  looking  for  our  help.  So  Brohghton, 
Hven  i/'et  our  eyes  are  spent  at  our  vain  help,  and  Notes,  Still  did  our  eyes  fail,  looking  for  help  in  vain.  The  same  sense  may 
be  retained  if  we  adopt  the  K'ri,  adhuc  nos  (sc.  conficimur)  vel  poiius  oculi  nostri  conficiunter  (Gerlach).  Yet  if  the  K'ri  is 
adopted,  the  lit.  translation  would  be,  as  yet  we,  see  Josh.  xiv.  11.  The  fact  that  this  is  the  initial  word,  gives  to  it  an  em- 
phasis, both  accurately  and  felicitously  expressed  in  the  English  Version,  As  for  us  still  our  eyes  failed  looking  for  our  vain 

help.—W.  H.  H.]— 1J'J"'y  nrSuri-     see  ii.  11.— HITV,  in  Jer.  xxxvii.  7.    for  the  construction  of  SdH  IJfllJJ',  see  my 

•■  ••        T  V  :   •  T  :■.■  :■  t  •  t:  v 

Gr.  (io,  4,  g.  [The  possessive  pronoun,  as  a  suffix,  may  come  between  a  noun  and  the  word  qualifying  it,  and  then  the  pro- 
noun and  qualifying  word  are  to  be  expressed  together :  our  help  of  ranity=our  vain  lielp.  See  Naeoels.  Gr. — W.  H.  H.] — 
S^n  in  Jer.  xvi.  19;  x.  3,  8  ;  ii.  5,  etc.—XVB'^  is  an-.  Aey.  r\ii^,  in  Jer.  vi.  17;  xlviii.  19.— iT^ty'in,  Jer.  xi.  12;  xiv.  9; 
xlii.  11,  etc.  See  also  7'y  V  XI 7,  Jer.  ii.  11.  Yet  Is.  xiv.  20  seems  to  have  been  especially  in  the  Poet's  mind,  where  it  is 
•aid  )}-'pV  xS  ^^r^^.- 

Ter.  18. — Concerning  "Vi^,  see  iii.  52.    With  reference  to  the  signification  insidiare,  lying-in-wait  for,  see  Mic.  vii.  2  ; 
Prov.  vi.  26,  and  the  nearly  related  711^,  1  Sam.  xxiv.  12.     The  reading  ny,  which  some  Codices  have  after  the  analogy 

TT  T 

of  Prov.  iv.  12;  Job  xviii.  7,  gives  a  less  suitable  sense.    [The  change  of  ^y  into  ^1V  may  have  been  suggested  by  the 

T  T 

difficulty  of  inten»roting  the  former  in  accordance  with  its  proper  signification  of  seizing,  catching  or  obtaining  by  hunting. 

See  Notes  below.— W.  II.  H.] — nj7i',  in  Jeremiah  once,  x.  23.    [Blatnet  :  "  The  LXX.  instead  of  1J''nj;];  seem  to  have  read 

lyi'V^'  ""''  '"''^  ones."    Here  again  is  a  change  of  the  text  suggested,  doubtless,  by  the  difficulty  of  hunting  (or  seizing 

upmi  asprey)  the  footsteps.— W.  H. H.]— For  the  construction  of  ni37D  see  Hl^^jnO,  ver.9.— 3n^,  Jer.  v.l;  xlviii.  38, 

etc. — 31p,  see  iii.  57. — ^J^D'  W7D.    The  expression  is  elsewhere  used  of  filling  up  the  measure  of  the  days  of  one's  life, 

-It  -t  :  It 

see  J(  r.  xxv.  34 ;  1  Chron.  xvii.  11.— Vp  X3,  Jer.  Ii.  3,  comp.  Am.  viii.  2 ;  Ez.  vii.  2-6. 

Ver.  19.— cbp-     The  Prophet  uses  the  adjective  "JH  in  ii.  23;  iii.  9;  xlvi.  6.    -lyDnh,  see  i.  3.— The  phrase  ^'^^^ifi 

D'DK?  occurs  only  here:  yet  see  Prov.  xxiii.  5 ;  xxx.  19.— p 7'!  is  properly  speaking  to  glow  with  heat,  to  bum,  Ps.  vii.  14; 

•-T  I    -T 

Ez.  xxiv.  10.    Then  it  is  used  in  the  transferred  sense  of  hot  pursuit,  and  indeed  at  first  with  'TnX  (as  it  were,  burning 

after  nnr)  Gen.  xxxi.  36;  1  Sam.  xvii.  .55.    Only  in  this  place  is  the  word  construed  directly  as  transitive  with  the  Ace.  of 

the  object.     Jeremiah  never  iiv.-iils  himself  of  the  word.— 1310,  very  frequent  in  Jer.,  ii.  2,  6 ;  iii.  2,  ete.— 31X,  see  iii.  10. 

T  :  ■  -  T 

Ver.  20. — The  expression  ^ ytJX  nil  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah  ;  but,  founded  on  Gen.  vii.  27,  in  Ex.  xv.  8 ;  Ps.  xviii. 

6  (2  Sam.  xxil.  16);  Job  iv.  9;  comp.  Cant.  vii.  9. — '•''''  P'lyD  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah.     See  1  Sam.  xxiv.  6,  7, 11;  xxvi.  9, 

11,16,23;  2  Sam.  i.  14, 16 ;  xlx.  22;  xxiii.  1.— 13^,  Jeremiah   uses  frequently.    See  ii.  56;  xxxviii.  28;  xlviii.  1,  etc. — 

n'riiy,  (comp.  Jl^nU',  Prov.  xxiii.  10)  is  found,  besides  here,  only  in  Ps.  cvii.  2,0.-^)1,  Jer.  vi.  4;  xlviiL  45. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL, 

Vers.  17-20.  With  few  but  telling  strokes  the 
Prophet  here  sketches  a  picture  of  the  events 
which  constitute  the  last  stadium  of  the  great 
catastrophe,  ending  with  the  imprisonment  of 
the  king.  He  describes  how  they  in  Jerusalem 
had   placed   their  last  hope  on  Egyptian  help, 


which  was  not  realized,  ver.  17.  Then,  omitting 
all  that  had  reference  to  the  capture  of  the  city 
itself,  he  passes  over  to  the  ilight  of  the  king, 
which  he  describes  so  graphically,  that  we  are 
obliged  to  regard  him  as  a  participator  in  the 
events  he  narrates.  He  describes  how  they  were 
so  closely  watched,  that  soon  all  hope  of  escape 
forsook  them,  ver.  18.  With  extraordinary  ce- 
lerity they  were  pursued,  ver.  19,  and  the  king 


IGJ 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


was  imprisoned.  With  that,  their  last  hope,  the 
hope  that  they  might  live  under  his  shadow,  in 
the  enjoyment  at  least  of  liberty,  even  if  among 
foreign  people,  was  frustrated,  ver.  20. 

Ver.  17.  As  for  us,  our  eyes  yet  failed 
for  our  vain  help.  Yet  stood  she!  Our  ei/es 
longed  after  our  vain  help.  She,  that  is  to  say  Je- 
rusalem, still  stood,  exclaims  the  Poet  with  em- 
phasis, and  thus  transports  us  into  the  historical 
eveui  of  which  he  treats.  [For  the  reasons 
stated  above  in  Textual  and  Grammatical  Notes, 
the  correct  translation  seems  to  be.  Still  did  our 
eyes  fail  looking  for  our  vain  help.  Literally, 
Still  our  eyes  exhausted  or  spent  themselves  (look- 
ing)/or  owr  vain  help. — W.  H.  H.]  The  Poet  de- 
scribes here  the  yearning  long-cherished  hope 
of  Egyptian  help.  The  retreat  of  the  Chaldean 
army  (Jer.  xxxvii.  5)  had  greatly  strengthened 
liiat  hope.  But  it  proved  delusive.  Instead  of 
the  Egyptian  army,  the  Chaldeans  were  soon 
seen  again  approaching  the  city  (Jer.  xxxvii.  8; 
xxxiv.  22).  [Our  vain  help.  Calvin:  "There 
is  an  implied  contrast  between  empty  and  fal- 
lacious help  and  the  help  of  God,  which  the  peo- 
ple rejected  when  they  preferred  the  Egyptians."] 
— In  our  watching — on  our  watch-toiver  [.?o 
Bl.wney,  Boothroyi),  Henderson,  Notes,  Ger- 
LACH,  D.vviDsoN  Lex.,  Ft'erst  Lex.'] — We  have 
■wratched  for  a  nation  that  could  not  save 
us — we  watched  for  a  people  that  helps  not  [or, 
will  not  help  (Gerlach),  or,  may  not,  i.  e.  cannot 
save.— W.  H.  H.] 

Yer.  18.  They  hunt  our  steps,  that  we 
cannot  go  in  our  streets — They  watched  our 
steps  that  loe  could  not  go  on  our  streets.  Ewald 
understands  the  first  half  of  the  verse  as  refer- 
ring to  an  edict  of  the  Egyptian  king,  which 
prohibited  the  refugees  who  were  in  Egypt  from 
carrying  on  traffic  of  any  kind  with  Palestine. 
This  was  considered,  and  not  without  reason, 
the  harshest  measure  that  could  be  imposed  upon 
them.  But  we  have  not  the  least  knowledge 
of  any  kind  of  trade  with  the  markets  of  Palestine 
at  the  time  of  its  depopulation,  or  of  any  prohi- 
bition of  visiting  those  markets.  Besides,  it  is 
not  at  all  probable  that  the  Jews,  who  had  fled 
to  Egypt,  impelled  by  fear  of  the  Chaldeans, 
would  have  had  any  desire  to  go  back  again 
within  the  reach  of  the  power  of  the  Chaldeans. 
Then,  too,  this  thought  in  this  connection  seems 
an  excessively  awkward  varepov  izporepov  [put- 
ting last  first].  Thenics  and  Vaihinger 
[Blayney,  also]  understand  these  words  of  the 
besieging  towers,  whence  the  streets  were  bom- 
barded and  so  walking  in  them  was  prevented. 
I  will  not  deny  that  from  these  towers  (see  re- 
marks on  Jer.  lii.  4,  5)  the  city  might  be  watched. 
But  to  refer  the  words  that  loe  could  not  walk  in 
the  streets  to  the  bombardment  of  the  streets, 
seems  to  me  a  singular  notion.  We  are  not  to 
suppose  that  the  besieging  machines  of  the  an- 
cients carried  cannon.  [Remembering  how  nar- 
row the  streets  of  oriental  cities  are  and  how 
protected,  often,  by  the  buildings  projecting  over 
them,  it  is  obvious  that  no  besieging  towers 
could  so  command  the  streets  as  to  expose  the 
citizens  to  the  aim  of  the  enemies'  weapons. — 
W.  H.  H.]  We  read  in  Jer.  lii.  7,  8,  "And  all 
the  men  of  war  fled,  by  the  way  of  the  gate  be- 
tween  I  he  two  walls,    which    was   by  the  king's 


garden:  (now  the  Chaldeans  were  by  the  city 
round  about;)  and  they  went  by  the  way  of  the 
plain.  But  the  army  of  the  Chaldeans  pursued 
after  the  king,  and  overtook  Zedekiah  in  the 
plains  of  Jericho ;  and  all  his  army  was 
scattered  from  him."  See  2  Kings  xxv.  4,  5. 
From  this  description  it  appears,  1st.  That  Zede- 
kiah with  his  men  of  war  endeavored  to  escape 
secretly,  and  did  so  escape  by  a  flight  at  night 
from  a  gate  situated  on  the  west  side  of  the  city. 
2d.  That  the  Chaldeans  sought  to  prevent  liis  es- 
cape. This  is  evident  from  their  surrounding  the 
city,  as  well  as  from  the  secret  flight  and  imme- 
diate pursuit.  It  is  also  obvious,  a  priori,  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  near  at  hand  for  the  very 
purpose  of  getting  possession  of  the  person  of  the 
king.  Now  does  not  our  passage  answer  exactly 
to  all  this?  All  the  steps  of  the  beleaguered 
citizens  were  observed,  so  that  they  could  not  go 
upon  their  streets  unhindered.  I  do  not  under- 
stand T\^^^\'^^^streets  of  the  country  roads.  But  I 
believe  that  the  passages  leading  out  of  the  city, 
as  for  example  the  way  between  the  walls,  can  be 

classed  with  the  nOTTl^siree/s.  [The  verb  ren- 
dered hunt,  n^i',  means  (see  remarks  oniii.  52),  not 
merely  to  hunt,  but  to  take  by  hunting,  not  merely 
to  lay  snai'cs  (Notes),  but  to  ensnare  or  take  in  snares. 
It  clearly  has  this  meaning,  it  seems  to  me.  both  in 
Mic.  vii.  2  and  Prov.  vi.  26.     The  word  rendered 

streets,  niDrTl,  means  the  streets  of  a  city,  as  is 
plainly  evident  here  from  the  expression  our 
streets.  ^J'^^niS,  in  our  own  streets,  can  only  mean 
the  streets  of  our  city,  and  that  no  out  of  the  way 
passages  between  the  walls,  but  streets  that  were 
common  property,  and  which  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  wallc  in.  Our  text  then  can  only  mean 
that  those  who  appeared  on  the  streets  were  at 
ouce  arrested.  Zedekiah  and  his  army  were  not 
captured  in  the  streets,  but  far  away  from  the  city. 
It  is  obvious,  therefore,  that  neither  this  verse, 
nor  the  following  one,  refers  particularly  to  the 
flight  and  capture  of  Zedekiah  and  his  army.  It 
relates  to  a  time  posterior  to  that  event.  The 
city  was  already  in  possession  of  the  Chaldeans: 
the  enemy  had  entered  into  the  gates  of  Jerusalem 
(ver.  12),  which  did  not  occur  till  one  month 
after  Zedekiah's  capture.  The  Prophet  having 
announced  in  ver.  11,  that  the  Divine  wrath  was 
accomplished,  and  Zion  consumed  with  fire  to 
\]iQ\evy  foundationsthereof,  goes  back  in  vers.  12- 
16,  to  attribute  this  event  to  the  sins  of  the  pro- 
phets and  priests,  and  to  show  how  they  were 
abhorred  and  punished, — then  in  ver.  17,  he  tells 
us,  how  those  that  were  left  in  the  city  continued 
to  the  very  last  to  hope  for  Egyptian  aid, — in  ver. 
18,  that  they  could  not  escape  from  the  city,  for 
they  were  captured  the  moment  they  appeared  in 
the  streets, — in  ver.  19,  that  those  who  did  man- 
age to  escape  from  the  city,  were  pursued  and 
captured,  whether  they  fled  to  the  mountains  or 
the  desert, — and  ver.  20,  declaring  that  their 
king  was  already  a  prisoner,  recognizes  the  fact 
that  tlie  kingdom  is  destroyed  and  their  inde- 
pendent nationality  is  at  an  end.  With  all  this 
the  last  half  of  ver.  18  harmonizes;  when  they 
found  that  the  Egyptians  did  not  come,  and  that 
they  were  wholly  in  tlie  power  of  the  Chaldeans, 


CHAP.   IV.  17-20. 


167 


then  it  was  evident  that  their  end  was  near,  their 
days  fulfilled, — yea,  their  end  had  actually  come  I 
We  translate  the  first  half  of  the  verse,  therefore, 
They  hunted  our  steps,  or  they  ensnared  our  steps, 
that  is,  they  were  on  the  watch  for  us  and  caught 
us  as  a  wily  trapper  watching  the  steps  of  his 
game,  so  that  we  could  not  go  in  our  streets. — W.  H. 
H.] — Our  end  is  near,  our  days  are  ful- 
filled; for  our  end  is  come.  \_Our  end  ap- 
proached, our  days  were  fulfilled,  for  (or  yea,  ja, 
Gerlach)  our  end  arrived,  or  was  actually  come. 
There  is  no  change  of  tense  from  the  first  half  of 
the  verse. — W.  H.  H.]  These  are  the  ipsissima 
verba  of  the  fugitives,  which  describe  most  gra- 
phically how  they  felt,  when  they  observed  that 
their  flight  was  discovered.  Since  many  sur- 
vived those  days,  among  others  the  king  and  the 
Poet  himself,  it  is  evident  that  these  words  are 
to  be  interpreted,  not  of  what  happened,  but  of 
what  they  feared  would  happen.  Besides,  the 
second  half  of  the  verse,  composed  of  two  mem- 
bers, is  climacteric ;  for  in  the  first,  the  end  is 
indicated  only  as  near,  but  in  the  second  as  come, 
and  therefore  the  measure  of  life  as  fulfilled. 
[These  words  were  not  the  words  of  "fugitives," 
for  reasons  given  above.  They  may  have  been 
the  words  of  the  would-be  fugitives,  those  who 
would  have  escaped  from  the  city  if  they  had  not 
been  arrested  in  the  streets  of  the  city.  It  is 
better,  however,  to  regard  them  as  the  words  of 
the  Prophet.  The  Egyptians  did  not  come  to  the 
rescue.  Escape  from  the  city  was  impossible. 
Then,  says  he,  our  end  approached,  the  days  of  our 
national  existence  were  accomplished,  yea  our  end 
actually  arrived,  when  the  city  was  consumed  with 
fire,  and  the  people  transported  to  Babjdon. — 
W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  19.  Our  persecutors  are — our  pursuers 
vere — s'wifter  than  the  eagles  of  the  heaven. 
The  image  of  the  eagles  is  taken  from  Jer.  iv. 
13,  where  it  is  said  of  the  enemy  from  the  north 
"his  horses  are  swifter  than  eagles."  See  2  Sam. 
i.  23.  Their  apprehension  proves  to  be  well 
founded.  The  pursuit  was  begun  instantly  and 
with  the  greatest  energy. — They  pursued  us 
upon  the  mountains,  they  laid  -wait  for  us 
in  the  wilderness.  On  the  moujitains  they 
chased  us,  in  the  wilder7iess  they  were  on  the  watch 
for  us  [Gerlach:  laid  snares  for  ms.]  It  is  to  be 
observed  that  the  way  from  Jerusalem  to  Jeri- 
cho, at  first  over  heights  (beginning  with  the 
Mount  of  Olives)  leads  directly  down  into  the 
plain  of  the  Ghor.  See  the  full  description  of 
this  road  in  Rittek's  Geography,  xv.  1,  pp.  485 
If.  Let  the  suffixes  of  the  first  person  be  care- 
fully observed  in  this  whole  narration  of  the 
flight  of  the  king,  vers.  18-20.  Would  not  one, 
who  knew  of  the  facts  only  by  hear-say,  have 
used  the  third  person  ?*  And  does  not  the  first 
person  show,  as  also  the  animated  clearly  defined 
particulars  do,  that  he  himself  had  participated 
in  the  flight  from  that  fierce  pursuit?  [Granting 
that  the  flight  and  pursuit  of  the  king  are  here  in- 
tended, there  is  surely  nothing  in  the  description 
that  necessarily  implies  the  presence  of  the  au- 
thor with  the  king.  But  we  have  seen  above 
that  this  verse  cannot  relate  to  the  flight  and  cap- 

*  [Is  this  question  well  put  by  one  who  regards  the  third 
Song  as  the  composition  of  another  than  Jeremiah  himself? 
— W.  H.  H.J 


tare  of  the  king.  The  Prophet  is  simply  relating 
the  fate  of  the  people  and  confirming  his  declara- 
tion that  their  end,  as  a  people,  a  nation,  had  come, 
ver.  18.  The  Egyptians  did  not  arrive  for  their 
relief.  Those  who  ventured  into  the  streets  were 
seized  and  made  prisoners.  Those  who  managed 
to  escape  were  hotly  pursued  or  fell  into  am- 
bushes carefully  prepared  in  view  of  their  flight. 
They  were  now  hopeless  and  helpless.  And  to 
crown  all,  their  king  was  a  prisoner,  ver.  20,  and 
even  if  they  could  escape  from  their  pursuers, 
they  could  not  rally  around  his  sacred  person 
and  preserve  their  independent  sovereignty  in 
some  foreign  land.  Thus  in  very  truth  their  end 
had  come,  which  is  the  point  the  Prophet  has  in 
his  mind.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  20.  The  breath  of  our  nostrils.  [Owen: 
"A  kingdom  cannot  exist  without  a  king.  Hence 
the  king  may  be  said  to  be  the  breath  or  the 
life  of  the  body  politic."] — the  anointed  of  the 
LORD — of  Jehovah — was  taken  in  their  pits 
— -[Calvin:  in  their  snares.  Brougiiton:  wascaught 
in  their  trap.l — Of  whom  ■we  said,  under  his 
shadow — [or,  according  to  Owkn  and  Noyes, 
under  whose  shadow,  ive  said,^ — see  Is.  xxx.  2,  3; 
IIos.  xiv.  8  (7) ;  Ez.  xxxi.  17. — We  shall  live 
among  the  heathen — yhe  nations,  Calvin, 
Broughton,  Boothroyd,  Owen,  Noyes,  Ger- 
lach. Blayney:  "To  live  among  the  nations, 
probably  means  to  exist  in  a  national  capacity, 
or  as  one  among  them."]  It  is  not  the  purpose 
of  the  Poet  to  sound  the  praises  of  the  king.  The 
literal  meaning  of  the  words  and  the  connection 
utterly  refute  the  idea,  adopted  by  the  Chaldaic, 
Raschi  and  many  modern  commentators,  that 
this  refers  to  the  pious  Josiah,  whom  Jeremiah, 
according  to  2  Chron.  xxxv.  25,  glorified  in  a 
song  of  lamentation.  The  King  here  meant  can 
only  be  Zedekiah.  He  was  a  weak,  but  a  good- 
natured  king.  He  resembled  Louis  XVI.  of 
France.  Like  him  he  may  also  have  been  well- 
beloved.  But  the  principal  point  was  that  he  was 
king,  and  especially  the  theocratic  king.  Seneca 
says  (de  Clemenlia,  i.  4,  according  to  a  quotation 
of  Pareau's),  Ille  (princeps)  est  spiritus  vitalis, 
quern  hsec  tot  millia  [civium)  trahunt  [he  (the 
sovereign)  is  the  vital  breath,  which  so  many 
thousands  (of  citizens)  inhale].  Much  more 
the  theocratic  king,  the  Lord's  anointed,  the 
bearer  of  the  promises  (2  Sam.  vii.)  was  a  living 
pledge  of  the  continuance  and  prosperity  of  the 
people.  See  Ps.  xxviii.,  especially  ver.  8,  and 
Uelitzsch  on  that  place.  We  can  see,  besides, 
from  the  words  of  whom  we  said,  etc.,  what  plan 
with  reference  to  the  future  was  entertained  by 
the  fugitive  Jews.  They  hoped  to  escape  to  a 
friendly  heathen  nation,  and  there  gathering 
around  their  king  as  their  shield  and  security  of 
a  better  future,  pass  their  days  at  least  in  free- 
dom. [Wordsworth:  "It  has  been  objected  by 
some,  that  the  Lamentations  could  not  have  been 
written  by  Jeremiah  on  the  occasion  of  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  because  such  words  as 
these,  could  not  be  applied  to  sucli  a  vicious  kiu^ 
as  Zedekiah.  But  such  an  objection  as  this  be- 
trays an  ignorance  of  the  nature  of  true  loyalty, 
as  taught  by  Almighty  God  in  the  Old  Testament, 
as  well  as  in  the  New.  He  teaches  us  to  dis- 
tinguisii  the  person  of  the  sovereign  from  his 
office,  and  to   venerate   his  authority  as  from  God 


108 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


(Rom.  xiii.  1-7),  whatever  may  be  his  personal 
character.  Even  Saul  was  'the  Lord's  Anointed,' 
and  was  revered  and  bewailed  as  such  by  David. 
See  on  1  Sam.  xxvi.  8,  11,  16,  23;  2  Sam.  i.  14, 
16.  And  our  blessed  Lord  and  His  Apostles 
teach  us  to  obey  a  civil  ruler,  as  God's  deputy 
and  vicegerent,  in  all  things  not  unlawful,  al- 1 
though  that  ruler  may  bo  a  Tiberius  (see  on 
Matt.  xxii.  21)  or  a  Nero  (see  on  Rom.  xiii.  1- 
7:  Titus  iii.  1;  1  Pet.  ii.  13)."  Calvin:  "God 
made  David  king,  and  also  his  posterity,  for  this 
end.  that  the  life  of  the  people  might,  in  a  man- 
ner, reside  in  him.  As  far  then  as  David  was  the 
head  of  the  people,  and  so  constituted  by  God, 
he  was  even  their  life.  The  same  was  the  case 
with  all  his  posterity  as  long  as  the  succession 

continued But  we  must  observe    that 

these  high  terms  in  which  the  posterity  of  David 
were  spoken  of,  properly  belong  to  Christ  only; 
for  David  was  not  the  life  of  the  people,  except 
as  he  was  the  type  of  Christ  and  represented 
His  person.  Then  what  is  said  was  not  really 
found,  in  its  fullest  significance,  in  the  posterity 


of  David,  but  only  typically.  Hence  the  truth, 
the  reality,  is  to  be  sought  in  no  other  but  in 
Christ.  And  we  hence  learn  that  the  Church 
is  dead,  and  is  like  a  maimed  body,  when  sepa- 
rated from  its  Head.  ...  In  short,  Jeremiah 
means  that  the  favor  of  God  was,  as  it  were,  ex- 
tinguished when  the  king  was  taken  away,  be- 
cause the  happiness  of  the  people  depended  on 
the  king,  and  the  royal  dignity  was  as  it  were 
a  sure  pledge  of  the  grace  and  favor  of  God ; 
hence  the  blessing  of  God  ceased,  when  the  king 
was  taken  away  from  the  Jews.  .  .  .  We  shall  live, 
they  said,  even  among  the  nations  under  the  shadow 
of  our  king  ;  that  is,  'Though  we  may  be  driven 
to  foreign  nations,  yet  the  king  will  be  able  to 
gather  us,  and  his  shadow  will  extend  far  and 
wide  to  keep  us  safe.'  So  the  Jews  believed,  but 
falsely,  because  by  their  defection  they  had  cast 
away  the  yoke  of  Christ  and  of  God,  as  it  is  said 
in  Ps.  ii.  3.  As  then  they  had  shaken  oflF  the 
heavenly  yoke,  they  in  vain  trusted  in  the  shadow 
of  an  earthly  king,  and  were  wholly  unworthj 
of  the  guardianship  and  protection  of  God."] 


IV.  21,  22. 

21  Rejoice  and  be  glad,  O  daughter  of  Edom,  that  dwellest  in  the  land  of  Uz  :  the 
cup  also  shall  pass  through  unto  thee;  thou  shalt  be  drunken,  and  shalt  make  thy- 

22  self  naked.  The  punishment  of  thine  iniquity  is  accomplished,  O  daughter  of 
Zion ;  he  will  no  more  carry  thee  away  into  captivity :  he  will  visit  thine  iniquity, 
O  daughter  of  Edom  ;  he  will  discover  thy  sins. 


TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  21.— ■'f\3U;V.  For  the  form  see  Jer.  x.  17.  [May  we  recognize  a  peculiarity  of  Jeremiah  in  this  form  ?— W.  H.  H.] 
— ''t!?''B',  see  i.  21.— 0 13,  Jer.  XXV.  15, 17,  28;  xlix.  12;  li.7,  ete.  The  expression  O'l^jt^H  is  peculiar  to  this  place.— 
'y^'^,  inebriari,  Jer.  xxv.  27 ;  xlviii.  26 ;  Ii.  7,  39,  57.— Hithp.  of  HIV  only  here.    Jeremiah  uses  the  verb  in  no  form. 

-T  T    T 

Perhaps  there  lies  in  nj?nn  an  allusion  [ironical?]  to  that  n;^,  ^"1J7  of  the  Edomites,  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7. 

Ver.  22.— The  perfects'in  this  verse  indicate,  that  the  Poet  transfer-s  himself  into  the  future,  in  such  a  manner  that  he 
sees  what  is  yet  future,  as  if  it  were  actually  transpiring  before  him.— j'l^j;,  see  ver.  C— Dp,  frequent  with  Jeremiah,  i.  3 ; 
vi.  29  ;  xxiv.  10,  e«c.  The  phrase  j'l;;  DH  occurs  only  here.— Jeremiah  uses  Hiphil  of  S  JH  very  often,  xx.  4 ;  xxii.  12,  etc.: 
also  the  Piel,  see  ii.  14,  where  the  construction  with  ^_J^  also  occurs.— np3,  Jer.  v.  9,  29;  xxv.  12,  etc.  The  phrase  lp3 
rij?  is  a  characteristic  of  the  Pentateuch,  Ex.  xx.  5 ;  xxxiv.  7 ;  Lev.  xviii.  25  ;  Num.  xiv.  18 ;  Deut.  v.  9 :  yet  it  is  also  found 
in  Jeremiah,  xxv.  12  ;  xxxvi.  31. 

that  time,  or  at  an  earlier  period,  or  whether  it 
merely  refers  to  such  an  extension  in  a  general 
way,  is  very  questionable.  Ewald  (on  this  text 
and  Gesch.  d.  B.  Isrl.  IV.  S.  9)  is  of  the  opinion, 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  had  extended  the  dominion 
of  the  Edomites  "  in  the  land  of  Uz  far  to  the 
north-east."  But  this  position  of  the  land  of  Uz 
[north-east  of  Idumea]  is  very  problematical. 
See  remarks  on  Jer.  xxv.  20.  At  all  events,  the 
words  are  most  easily  explained  if  the  dwelling 
in  the  land  of  Uz  is  regarded  as  an  evidence  of 
success  and  a  cause  for  rejoicing  on  the  part  of 
Edom.  The  historical  accounts  are  too  sparse  to 
enable  us  to  ascertain  anything  on  this  subject 
with  certainty.  See  Carl  von  Raumer,  Eastern 
Palestine  and  the  land  of  Edom,  in  Berghaus' 
Annals,  18.30,  Vol.  I  pp.  563,  564.  [Brough- 
TON  :   "From  Esay.  to  the   Herods  Edom  hated 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  21,  22.  In  conclusion  the  Poet  addresses 
a  word  of  threatening  to  Edom,  in  the  midst  of 
which  a  word  of  comfort  addressed  to  Zion, 
renders  the  severity  of  the  threatening  still  more 
impressive.  That  the  Edomites  most  maliciously 
rejoiced  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and 
even  contributed  towards  it,  we  know  from  Ps. 
cxxxvii.  7;  Ez.  xxv.  12;  xxxv.  15;  xxxvi.  5. 
See  remarks  on  Jer.  xlix.  7-22,  to  which  the 
ironical  'nOK/l  'tyiy,  rejoice  and  be  glad,  here 
refer. 

Ver.  21.  Rejoice — exult — and  be  glad,  O 
daughter  of  Edom,  that  dwellest  in  the 
land  of  Uz.  Whether  this  refers  to  an  exten- 
sion of  the   dominion  of  Edom   that  existed  at 


CHAP.  IV.  21,  22. 


169 


Jacob,  and  no  leas  than  ten  prophecies  are  against 
them,  as  Barbinel  noteth  upon  Obadias  "  Cal- 
vin :  "  The  Idumeans,  above  others,  had  mani- 
fested hostility  to  the  chosen  people.  And  the 
indignity  was  the  greater,  because  they  had  de- 
scended from  the  same  father,  for  Isaac  was  their 
common  father;  and  they  derived  their  origin 
from  two  brothers,  Esau  and  Jacob.  As,  then, 
the  Idumeans  were  related  to  the  Jews,  their 
cruelly  was  less  tolerable ;  for  they  thus  forgot 
their  own  race,  and  raged  against  their  brethren 
and  rehitives."]. — The  cup  also  shall  pass 
through  unto  thee — al-w  to  thee  shall  the  cup 
pass  over.  [Calvin:  "He  employs  a  common 
metaphor;  for  adversity  is  denoted  in  the  Scrip- 
ture by  the  word  cup ;  for  God,  according  to  His 
will,  gives  to  drink  to  each  as  much  as  He 
pleases.  .  .  .  Nor  does  He  allow  any  one  either 
to  reject  the  cup  offered,  or  to  throw  away  the 
wine,  but  He  constrains  him  to  drink  and  to  ex- 
haust, to  the  very  dregs  as  much  as  He  gives  to 
each  to  drink.  Hence  it  is  for  this  reason  that 
the  Prophet  says  now  that  the  cup  would  pass  over 
10  the  Idumeans  ;  for  we  know  that,  shortly  after, 
iliey  were  subdued  by  the  Chaldeans,  with  whom 
liiey  had  before  been  united.  But  when  they 
had  by  their  perfidy  fallen  off  from  their  treaty, 
t:iey  were  in  their  turn  punished"]. — Thou 
shalt  be  drunken.  Thou  shah  get  drunk.  [By 
drunkenness  here  we  are  to  understand  "that 
judicial  infatuation"  (Blayney)  which  leads  to 
all  sorts  of  shame  and  self-injury,  and  exposes 
its  subject  to  the  cruel  mercies  of  his  enemies. — 
W.  H.  H.]. — And  shalt  make  thyself  naked. 
Drunkenness  and  denudation,  intoxication  and 
shame  go  together:  see  Gen.  ix.  21 ;  Hab.  ii.  15,  Iti. 
Ver.  22.  The  punishment  of  thine  ini- 
quity (marg.  simply.  Thine  iniquity)  is  accom- 
plished.— Blotted  out  is  thy  guilt  [or  we  can 
translate  Dr.  Naegelsbach's  translation,  Thy 
debt  is  paid,  Getilgt  ist  deine  Schuld.  Gerlach  : 
thy  guilt  is  at  an  end.  All  the  English  translators, 
except  Owen,  take  V}?  in  the  first  member  of  the 
verse  as  the  punishment  of  iniquity,  and  in  the 
second  member  as  iniquity  itself.  Owen  trans- 
lates the  word  iniquity  in  both  members,  but  ex- 
plains the  first  as  meaning  punishment :  "  to 
complete  iniquity,"  he  says,  "  can  here  mean  no 
other  thing  than  to  complete  the  punishment  due 
to  it."  It  is  an  awkward  confusion  of  terms 
and  injures  the  antithesis  between  the  two  mem- 
bers of  the  verse  to  put  two  meanings  on  this 
one  word.  We  are,  doubtless,  to  take  the  word 
in  both  clauses  in  tue  sense  of  guilt,  desert  of 
and  liability  to  punishment,  and  understand  the 
whole  verse  as  intended  in  a  prophetical  and  an- 
ticipatory sense.  The  exile  the  Jews  were  now 
suffering  would  exhaust,  as  it  were,  the  demands 
of  justice  against  them  ;  and  in  view  of  this  the 
Prophet  says.  Thy  guilt  is  blotted  out,  or  cancelled, 
or  at  an  end.  Wordsworth:  "Rather,  thy  sin 
(see  ver.  6)  is  accomplished,  completed  and  taken 
away;  and  for  this  use  of  the  verb  (tain)  here, 
see  iii.  22;  Jer.  vi.  29;  xliv.  12;  where  it  is 
rendered  by  consumed,  and  Gesen.  867." — W.  H. 
H.]. — He  will  no  more  carry  thee  away 
into  captivity — he  tvill  not  banish  thte  longer 
[lit.  /'(«  will  not  add  to  banish  thee.  This  does  not 
imply,  as  many  commentators  seem  to  apprehend, 
a  promise  that  God  would  never  again  send  the 


Jewish  nation  into  captivity.  But  it  means  only 
that  their  present  exile  should  not  be  prolonged 
beyond  the  limit  determined  by  their  guilt.  It 
involves  rather  a  promise  of  a  return  to  their 
own  land,  when  their  iniquity  was  thus  cancelled 
by  the  punishment  received. — W.  H.  H.]. — He 
will  visit  thine  iniquity — He  visits  thy 
guilt.  See  i.  8. — O  daughter  of  Edom,  he 
will  discover — he  uncovers — thy  sins.  The 
two  halves  of  the  verse  correspond  to  each  other: 
each  of  them  has  the  name  of  a  nation  for  its 
central  point ;  to  the  ^Jl^  DP,  finished  or  cancelled 
IS  thy  guilt,  of  the  first  half,  corresponds  the 
'ijpi^  "ypji,  he  visits  thine    iniquity,   of  the  second ; 

and  to  the  ^(^i /JH,  lo  banish  thee,  of  the  first  half, 
corresponds  the  HvJ,  uncovers,  of  the  second. 
[This  is  more  apparent  in  Hebrew,  because  the 
last  two  words  referred  to  are  derived  from  the 
same  verbal  root.  Some  have  attempted  to  make 
the  correspondence  complete  by  giving  the 
same  sense  to  both  these  words.  Thus  Booth- 
ROYD  translates  the  first  he  will  no  more  expose 
thee,  and  the  second  he  ivill  expose  thy  sins.  But 
the  Hiphil  form  of  the  first  phrase  will  not  allow 
us  to  translate  it  in  the  same  sense  as  the  Kal 
form  of  the  second  word,  nor  does  the  Hiphil 
ever  seem  to  be  used  in  any  other  sense  than 
til  at  of  leading  away,  causing  to  go  away,  driving 
away,  or  carrying  captive.  Henderson,  on  the 
other  hand  (Blayney  and  Owen  give  the  same 
sense),  translates  the  first  phrase  he  will  no 
more  hold  thee  captive,  and  the  second  he  will  carry 
thee  away  captive  because  of  thy  sins,  which  agrees 
with  the  marginal  reading  in  our  English  Bible. 
But  the  Kal  might  mean  to  go  away  into  captivity, 
but  cannot  have  the  Hiphil  sense  of  carrying  away. 
More  than  this,  the  grammatical  construction 
would  require  us  to  understand  that  he  made 
their  sins  captive  instead  of  their  persons.  And 
more  than  all  the  Hebrew  phrase  is  constantly 
used  in  the  sense  of  uncovering  sins,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  exposing  them  to  contempt,  rebuke  and 
punishment.  For  these  reasons  it  seems  neces- 
sary to  acquiesce  in  the  translation  above  given. 
— Wordsworth:  "  He  hath  uncovered  the  sins 
of  Edom;  and  hath  covered  those  of  Israel." — 
W.  H.  H.] 

JVote  on  Authorship.*  It  seems  to  me  that  this 
Song  contains  some  hints  in  reference  to  its  au- 
thor that  are  worthy  of  consideration.  1.  The 
brilliant  descriptive  sketch  of  the  Princes  of 
Judah,  given  by  the  Poet  in  ver.  7,  should  be 
considered.  2.  He  charges  the  blame  of  the 
prodigious  misfortune  entirely  to  the  Priests  and 
Prophets,  vers.  13-15  (see  also  ii.  14),  whilst  it 
appears  from  Jeremiah  that  the  secular  leaders 
of  the  people  [die  weltlicheu  Grossen]  were  not 
less  guilty.  See  Jer.  ii.  26;  v.  5,  2-3-28;  xxiii. 
1,  2;  xxxiv.  19;  xxxvii.,  xxxviii.  xliv.  17.  His 
way  of  putting  things  conveys  to  us  the  im- 
pression, that  the  author  may  have  been  an  ac- 
complished member  of  the  lay  aristocracy,  pos- 
sessed of  great  love  for  his  own  particular  order. 
3.  This  conclusion  is  favored  by  the  fact,  as  he 
gives  us  very  plainly  to  understand,  that  he  was 


*  [This  note,  appended  to  the  introduction  to  the  chapter 
by  tlie  .author,  h.as  been  transferred  to  the  end  of  ttie  cliapter 
by  the  Translator,  in  order  to  preserve  the  connection  un- 
broken.—W.  H.  U.j 


170 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


one  of  the  companions  of  the  king  in  his  flight, 
vers.  17-20.  It  would  seem  then,  that  he  was 
one  of  the  polished  and  well-disposed  Princes 
belonging  to  the  Court  of  the  King.  Was  he, 
perhaps,  that  Seraiah,  who  was  the  son  of  Neriah 
and  brother  of  Baruch  (Jer.  li.  59)  ?  [The  argu- 
ments here  indicated  have  been  already  suffi- 
ciently answered.  It  remains  only  to  say,  1. 
That  Jeremiah  was  fully  equal  to  a  much  fuller 
and  more  "brilliant"  description  of  the  princes, 
than  that  contained  in  ver.  7,  both  from  his 
personal  knowledge  of  the  court,  and  his  imagi- 
native, poetical  and  rhetorical  abilities,  as  ex- 
hibiied  in  his  book  of  Prophecies.  2.  The  author, 
even  supposing  him  to  be  one  of  the  Princes,  can 
not  be  charged  with  the  criminal  partiality  of 
attempting  to  throw  a  veil  over  the  sins  of  his 
own  peers.  While  ver.  13  charges  special  guilt 
on  Prophets  and  Priests,  as  also  Jeremiah  (him- 
self both  Prophet  and  Priest)  does;  yet  the 
whole  people  are  represented  as  given  up  to  sin, 
like  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  of  old,  ver.  (J; 
and  the  %  with  which  ver.  6  begins,  shows  that 
the  secular  nobility,  represented  in  ver.  5  as 
those  who  "  fed  delicately"  and  were  "brought 
up  in  scarlet,"  sufl"ered  the  punishment  of  their 
own  "  iniquity."  If  it  could  be  shown  that  the 
book  of  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  written  by  a 
Prophet  and  Priest,  souglit  to  extenuate  the  guilt 
of  those  two  classes  and  to  lay  the  blame  chiefly 
on  the  secular  nobility,  then  there  might  be  some 
show  for  the  argument  that  this  Book  of  Lamenta- 
tions, which  lays  the  onus  of  the  guilt  on  Pro- 
phets and  Priests,  was  not  written  by  Jeremiah. 
But  the  very  opposite  of  this  is  true:  and  in  Jer. 
xxvi.  7-24,  the  Prophet  actually  represents  the 
Princea  as  resisting  the  conspiracy  of  the  Pro- 
phets and  Priests,  to  put  him  to  deafh.  Who 
then  would  be  more  likely  to  show  a  preference 
for  the  Princes,  to  the  other  two  orders  alluded 
to,  than  Jeremiah  himself?  In  fact,  however,  no 
such  preference  is  shown.  3.  Vers.  17-19  do 
not  and  cannot  describe  the  flight  and  capture 
of  the  king  and  his  army.  If  it  were  possible  to 
interpret  them  of  those  events,  we  must  decide 
that  they  are  anything  but  "  graphic,"  and  have 
none  of  the  characteristics  which  would  mark  the 
report  of  an  eye-witness  of  those  events  and  a 
participator  in  them.  Only  an  author  capable 
of  the  brusque  personation  of  Jeremiah  in  the 
third  chapter,  by  the  abrupt  introduction  of  "  I 
am  the  man,"  could  possibly  be  guilty  of  such  an 
awkward  and  preposterous  absorption  of  the 
king,  princes,  and  "all  the  men  of  war"  in  his 
own  person,  by  tumbling  tliera  all  into  the  nar- 
rative condensed  into  the  single  pronoun  "us," 
without  any  other  announcement  or  the  slightest 
intimation  of  the  rank,  character  and  numbers 
of  those  who  now  appear  upon  the  scene.  As 
Dr.  Naegelsbach  can  accept  the  absurdity  in- 
volved in  the  idea  that  Jeremiah  was  not  the  au- 
thor of  the  third  chapter,  he  can  be  pardoned  for 
the  absurdity  involved  in  the  idea,  that  the  "  us," 
in  ver.  17  of  this  chapter,  means  king  Zedekiah 
and  his  companions  in  flight,  including  "all  the 
men  of  war."  But  where  are  the  graphic  fea- 
tures of  the  description,  "die  er  so  anschaulicii 
beschreibt,  dass  man  sicli  fast  genothigt  sieht, 
ihn  fiir  einen  Theilnehmer  derselben  zu  halten," 
t.  e.,  that  there  is  no   escape  from  the  conclusion 


that  the  writer  was  a  participant  in  the  scenei 
he  describes?  Where  are  the  allusions  to  the 
facts  that  they  escaped  under  cover  of  the 
"night,"  "  by  the  way  of  the  gate  between  the 
two  walls,  which  was  by  the  king's  garden," 
that  "  all  the  men  of  war"  went  with  the  king 
and  that  when  the  king  was  taken  the  army  was 
"scattered  from  him"  (2  Kings  xxv.  3-5;  Jer. 
lii.  6-8)  ?  On  the  other  hand,  here  are  facts  in- 
consistent with  those  referred  to,  that  they  were 
on  their  watch-towers,  watching  for  help,  not  at- 
tempting escape,  ver.  17,  and  that  they  could  not 
go  in  the  streets  without  being  arrested  by  those 
who  hunted  their  steps,  ver.  18,  involving  the 
idea  that  the  city  r/as  already  in  possession  of 
the  enemy, — whereas,  before  the  enemy  were 
actually  in  the  city,  Zedekiah  and  his  army  made 
a  secret  and  unobserved  escape,  and  wore  not 
pursued  till  after  they  had  gone  completely  round 
the  walls  of  the  city  from  west  to  east  and  were 
on  their  way  to  the  plains  of  Jericho.  Finally: 
it  should  be  observed  that  the  completeness  of 
the  Poem  requires  us  to  interpret  these  last  verses 
of  the  events  that  followed  the  capture  of  the 
king.  They  describe  the  last  scene  in  the  ca- 
tastrophe, the  feelings  and  the  fate  of  the  people, 
remaining  in  the  city,  when  the  Chaldeans  took 
possession  of  it  and  proceeded  to  their  work  of 
plunder,  violence  and  destruction.  And  it  is 
written  just  as  we  would  suppose  Jeremiah,  who 
was  found  in  imprisonment  by  the  Chaldeans,  at 
that  time,  and  who  actually  witnessed  what  he 
describes,  would  have  written  it. — W.  H.  H.] 

DOCTRINAL    AND    ETHICAL. 

1.  Ver.  1.  "If  the  violation  of  a  material 
Temple,  such  as  that  of  Jerusalem  formerly  was, 
is  so  sad  and  sorrowful  a  spectacle;  how  much 
more  sad  and  sorrowful  would  be  the  violation 
of  spiritual  temples,  such  as  the  bodies  of  Chris- 
tians? Yet  they  are  violated  by  other  crimes 
against  conscience,  as  well  as  especially  by  forni- 
cation and  murders  (1  Cor.  vi.  15-20).  But  woe 
to  such  a  violator!  For  he  in  turn  shall  be  de- 
stroyed by  the  just  judgment  of  God  (1  Cor.  iii. 

16,    17)."    FORSTER. 

2.  Vers.  1,  2.  The  children  of  Zion  are  here 
denoted  as  of  noble  extraction,  and  on  that  ac- 
count compared  to  precious  metals  and  precious 
stones,  which  never  could  become  so  black  and 
vile,  as  to  be  thrown  into  the  corners  of  the 
streets  as  worthless.  Israel  was  in  fact  the  no- 
bility of  the  human  race.  For  the  heathen  are 
nothing  else  than  the  homo  communis,  the  ordi- 
nary natural  man,  without  higher  life-power. 
But  Israel,  as  the  chosen  people,  represented  the 
power  of  the  higher  and  eternal  life,  though  only 
typically.  Therefore  it  represents  only,  as  it 
were,  the  lower  nobility,  or  nobility  in  the  lowest 
degree.  Yet  this  is  always  a  real  nobility.  The 
meanest  Jew  carries  about  with  him  to  this  day, 
in  his  crooked  nose,  a  diploma  of  nobility,  which 
elevates  him  above  all  the  nobility  of  our  modern 
European  aristocrats,  for  he  is  thereby  legiti- 
matized as  a  son  of  Abraham.  But  what  is  this 
and  all  other  kinds  of  nobility  of  the  earthly  high- 
born, compared  to  the  nobility  of  those  born 
again  of  Christ  through  the  Word  and  Sacra- 
ment?    Nothing   but   "dung,"   as  Paul  decides, 


CHAP-  IV 


171 


who  in  Phil.  iii.  8  tears  hia  theoci*atic  patent  of 
nobility  into  shreds.  For  all  that  springs  from 
the  earth,  is  perishable,  corruptible,  subject  to 
bondage  (Gal.  iv.  23-25) ;  but  what  comes  from 
Heaven,  is  incorruptible,  eternal,  glorious,  truly 
free  (Gal.  iv.  26).  Before  that  absolute  nobility, 
moreover,  all  earthly  distinctions  vanish  away; 
here  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  here  is  neither 
bond  nor  free,  here  is  neither  male  nor  female ; 
for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus  (Gal.  iii. 
28).  And  on  this  account  the  Apostle  speaks 
such  earnest  words  against  those  who  violate 
their  Christian  nobility  (1  Cor.  iii.  16,  17;  vi. 
14-16). 

3.  Vers.  1,  2.  "  We  are  here  reminded  that 
there  is  no  greater  happiness  on  earth,  than 
when  Churches  and  Schools  are  built,  in  which 
God's  pure  word  is  preached  and  His  worship 
duly  and  rightly  observed;  as  on  the  other  hand, 
there  can  be  no  greater  evil  than  when  all  these 
are  destroyed,  wherefore  Jeremiah  here  mourns 
first  of  all  and  most  of  all  over  such  a  destruc- 
tion. And  although  Churches  are  not  adorned 
with  gold  and  silver,  as  the  Temple  at  Jerusa- 
lem was,  yet  God's  word  and  Divine  worship 
rightly  performed  are  more  than  all  silver,  gold 
and  fine  gold.  To  which  purpose  David  says, 
Tlie  words  of  the  Lord  are  pure  words;  as  silver 
tried  in  a  furnace  of  earth,  purified  seven  times, 
Ps.  xii.  7  (G) :  The  law  of  Thy  mouth  is  better 
unto  me  than  thousands  of  gold  and  silver,  Ps. 
cxix.  72.  Therefore  we  should  look  to  it,  that 
we  do  not  by  despising  the  divine  word  forfeit 
such  a  precious  treasure,  as  did  the  Jewish 
people;  on  the  contrary,  loving  God's  word  and 
observing  diligently  a  pure  worship  and  by  the 
maintenance  of  pure  doctrine,  we  should  look 
to  it,  that  the  precious  gold  does  not  grow  dim 
nor  the  fine  gold  lose  its  lustre."  Wurtemb. 
Summarien. 

4.  Ver.  2.  "The  Jews  excelled  in  three  re- 
spects: in  profound  and  accurate  knowledge  of 
God  (Ps.  cxlvii.  20);  secondly,  in  the  beauty  of 
a  virtuous  life  (Sir.  xliv.  6);  thirdly,  in  careful 
observance  of  a  pure  worship  (1  Mac.  iv.  43)."' 
Thomas  Aquinas,  in  Ghisler.,  p.  176. 

5.  Ver.  2.  "  Sons  of  Zion,  to  wit  of  that 
looked-for  city,  which  the  Lord  hath  built,  that 
it  may  be  seen  in  its  glory, — sons  of  the  supernal 
Jerusalem,  wnich  is  free,  our  mother;  illustrious 
by  the  dignity  of  their  condition ;  clothed  in  the 
primest  gold,  by  their  likeness  to  God.  How 
then  have  we,  who  have  become  esteemed  as 
earthen  vessels,  degenerated  from  these  [Sons 
of  Zion]  into  these  vile  and  fragile  bodies!" 
Bernhard  v.  Clairv.  in  Ghisler.,  S.  177. 

6.  Ver.  2'.  "  Let  men  of  noble  rank  regard  this 
as  said  to  themselves,  lest,  because  they  are 
likened  to  gold  on  account  of  the  celebrity  of  their 
family,  they  grow  proud  and  imperious,  but 
rather  let  them  be  persuaded  to  remember,  that 
they  are  in  the  hands  of  the  celestial  potter  (Sir. 
xxxiii.  13),  who  can  easily  transmute  gold  into 
earthen  vessels,  yea,  and  break  these  up  into 
pieces  (Ps.  ii.  9)."  Forster.  [Scott:  "The 
glory  of  outward  distinctions  and  privileges  may 
soon  be  obscured:  Sin  tarnishes  the  beauty  of 
the  most  excellent  gifts;  and  when  the  Lord 
leaves  churches, or  nations,  their  'glory  is  de- 
parted.'    But  that  'gold  tried  in  the  fire'  which 


Christ  bestows,  will  never  be  taken  from  us;  not 
can  its  excellency  be  diminished."] 

7.  Vers.  3,  4.  [Scott:  "Extreme  nece.-ssity 
has  a  tendency  to  render  the  heart  callous  and 
unfeeling:  they  who  have  improperly  indulged 
their  children  when  in  prosperity,  have  often  been 
most  regardless  of  them  in  distress:  and  the  hu- 
man species  lias  frequently  been  found  more 
cruel  and  insensible,  than  the  most  ferocious  and 
stupid  of  the  irrational  creatures."] 

8.  Ver.  5.  ^'^  Per  quod  quispeccat,  per  idem  puni- 
iur  et  ipse,  that  in  which  a  man  sins  is  the  means 
of  his  punishment."  Foester.  [Henry:  "It  is 
the  wisdom  of  those  who  have  abundance,  not  lo 
use  themselves  too  nicely,  for  then  hardships, 
when  they  come,  will  be  doubly  hard,  Deut.  xxviii. 
56."]. 

9.  Ver.  6.  "As  the  grace  afforded  us  in  the  ma- 
nifestation of  the  word  of  God  is  greater  than  that 
given  to  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom,  so  is  our  im- 
penitence more  heinous,  and  severer  punishment 
on  that  account  is  to  be  expected.  So  Christ 
clearly  shows  in  Matt.  xi.  20-24.  Verily!  we 
should  not  despise  this  thunder-clap ;  for  it  cer- 
tainly applies  to  us,  who  are  richly  endowed 
with  the  gospel,  but  do  not  walk  consistently 
with  it  or  worthily  of  it,  but  its  daily  invitations, 
inducements,  and  warnings  are  given  to  the 
wind;  thus,  as  the  Prophet  Jeremiah  here  says, 
The  iniquity  of  my  people  is  greater  than  the 
sin  of  Sodom,  that  was  suddenly  overthrown." 
Egid.  Hunnius.  "The  sin  of  the  people  called 
of  God  is  always  the  greatest,  because  it  has 
most  abused  the  revelation  of  God.  Therefore  is 
its  punishment  also  worse  than  that  of  Sodom, 
which  was  suddenly  destroyed,  without  suffering 
long  torments  from  barbarous  enemies.  God 
often  chastises  us  here  longer  than  He  does  the 
heathen  ;  but  He  does  it  to  spare  us  the  punish- 
ment which  is  eternal."  Diedrich. 

10.  Ver.  6.  "  AVe  are  admonished  here,  that  as. 
there  is  disparity  of  i^unishments,  so  is  there  dis- 
parity [in  the  heinousness]  of  sins.  Hence  the 
paradox  of  the  Stoics,  who  esteemed  all  sins  equal, 
is  shown  to  be  false."  Forster.  "The  iniquity  of 
the  Jewish  people  was  rendered  greater  tlian  the 
sin  of  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom,  because  the 
latter  transgressed  only  the  law  of  nature,  while 
the  former  transgressed  both  natural  and  written 
law."   Rhabanus  in  Ghisler.,  p.  185. 

11.  Vers.  7,  8.  This  is  an  instructive  example 
of  the  perishable  and  transient  nature  of  all 
merely  earthly  splendor.  What  is  there  in  all 
the  beauty,  wealth,  and  pomp  of  the  young 
noblemen  and  their  wives  and  daughters!  Can 
there  be  a  finer  picture  of  the  aristocrat's  coa- 
dition  than  we  read  here  in  the  seventh  verse? 
Is  not  the  difference  between  the  common  race 
of  man  and  the  nobly  bred  placed  here  before 
our  eyes  in  the  distinctest  manner?  Yet,  it  is 
seen  from  ver.  8,  that  if  our  Lord  God  has  only 
hung  the  bread-basket  above  their  reach,  the 
bodies  of  princes  make  no  belter  show  than  those 
of  burghers  and  peasants.  From  which  we  learn 
that  there  is  no  essential  difference  between 
them. 

12.  Ver.  7.  "Kings  and  Princes,  their  courts 
and  courtiers  appear,  now-a-days,  just  the  same 
as  they  were  long  ago  portrayed  in  David's 
Psalms,   in   the   Ecclesiastes   and   Proverbs   of 


172 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Solomon,  and  in  the  Wisdom  of  Sirach.  What 
we  say  of  them  now  in  German,  Latin,  or  French, 
is  just  what  was  said  long  ago  in  Hebrew  or 
Syriac."  Doctor  Leidemit,  p.  43. 

13.  Ver.  9.  "Four  principal  judgments  are 
especially  enumerated  by  the  Prophet  Ezekiel 
in  his  fourteenth  chapter ;  namely,  War,  Famine, 
Pestilence,  and  Wild-beasts.  Of  these,  Famine 
is  by  no  means  the  least,  but  by  far  the  greatest 
and  most  severe,  so  that  here,  in  the  Lamenta- 
tions, it  is  said.  That  it  may  have  been  better 
for  those  killed  by  the  sword  than  for  those  who 
perislied  through  hunger.  But  this  is  not  meant 
of  hunger  that  happens  by  chance,  or  is  the  re- 
sult of  natural  causes  alone,  but  we  must  regard 
scarcity  and  starvation  as  God's  rod  (Deut.  xxviii. 
23,  2-4)."     Egid.  Hunnius. 

14.  Ver.  10.  If  mothers  cooked  their  children, 
this  was  an  unnatural  crime,  only  to  be  explained 
as  the  effects  of  blind  madness.  But  had  not 
Israel  also,  against  its  better  nature,  forgotten 
theHeavenlyFather  (Is.  i.  2-4)?  [Henry:  "This 
horrid  effect  of  long  sieges  had  been  threatened  in 
general.  Lev.  xxvi.  29;  Deut.  xxviii.  53,  and 
particularly  against  Jerusalem,  in  the  siege  of 
the  Chaldeans,  Jer.  xix.  9  ;  Ez.  v.  10.  I  know  not 
whether  to  make  it  an  instance  of  the  power  of 
necessity,  or  of  iniquity ;  but  as  the  Gentile  idola- 
ters were  justly  ^wen  upto  vile  affections,  Rom.  i.  26, 
80  these  Jewish  idolaters,  and  the  women  parti- 
cularly, who  had  made  cakes  to  the  queen  of  Heaven, 
and  taught  their  children  to  do  so  too,  were  st)-ipt 
of  natural  affection,  and  that  to  tlieir  own  children. 
Being  thus  left  to  dishonor  their  own  nature,  was 
a  righteous  judgment  on  them  for  the  dishonor 
they  had  done  to  God."] 

15.  Ver.  11.  "The  Lord  accomplished  His 
fury  upon  Jerusalem,  when  her  wickedness  was 
full,  just  as  the  sins  of  the  Amorites  were,  when 
they  were  destroyed  (Gen.  xv.  16).  He  did,  in- 
deed, pour  out  [effudit)  the  fire  of  His  indigna- 
tion, but  it  was  only  when  slie  (Jerusalem)  had 
abandoned  herself  [se  diffudit)  to  the  commission 
of  all  sorts  of  vices  and  crimes  ;  and  He  devoured 
her  foundations,  when  she  had  refused  to  accept 
the  foundation,  which  is  Christ.  Truly  she  re- 
jected Him,  the  precious,  square  stone,  laid  at 
the  foundation  of  our  whole  structure :  Who, 
when  He  saw  this  same  unhappy  Jerusalem, 
wept  over  her,  saying,  that  in  her  not  one  stone 
should  be  left  upon  another  (Matt.  xxiv.  2)." 
Paschasius  in  Ghisler.,  p.  192. 

16.  Ver.  11.  [Calvin:  Prayer.  "Grant,  Al- 
mighty God,  that  as  Thou  showest  by  Thy  Pro- 
phet that,  after  having  long  borne  with  Thine 
ancient  people.  Thy  wrath  at  length  did  so  far 
burn  as  to  render  that  judgment  above  all  others 
remarkable, — 0  grant  that  we  may  not,  at  this 
day.  by  our  obstinacy  or  by  our  sloth,  provoke 
Thy  wrath,  but  be  attentive  to  Thy  threatenings, 
yea,  and  obey  Thy  paternal  invitations,  and  so 
willingly  devote  ourselves  to  Thy  service,  that  as 
Thou  hast  hitherto  favored  us  with  Thy  blessings, 
so  Thou  may  est  perpetuate  them,  until  we  shall 
at  length  enjoy  the  fulness  of  all  good  tilings 
in  Thy  celestial  kingdom,  through  Christ  our 
Lord.   Amen."] 

17.  Ver.  12.  "The  Holy  Ghost  here  teaches 
us  that  tiiere  is  on  earth  no  city  so  secure,  no 
kingdom  so  powerful,  no  stronghold  so  impreg- 


nable, that  it  may  not  be  destroyed  by  sins  and 
unrighteousness  (as  by  the  strongest  battering- 
rams,  Cramer).  On  that  account,  to  trust  in 
strongholds  is  idle,  and  is  rebuked  and  con- 
demned by  the  Holy  Ghost."  Egid.  Hunnius. 
"  The  heathen  princes  themselves  had  not  before 
this  believed  tliat  such  a  calamity  could  happen 
to  Jerusalem,  for  they  regarded  it  with  a  certain 
feeling  of  awe,  because  they  liad  an  inward  tes- 
timony that  the  true  God  had  prepared  there  a 
place  for  His  manifestation."  Diedrich. 

18.  Ver.  13.  "  The  Holy  Spirit  further  teaches 
us  here  what  a  corrupt  condition  ensues  in  the 
whole  spiritual  theocracy,  when  those  quit  the 
right  path  of  the  only  true,  genuine  service  of 
God,  who  should  most  of  all  keep  to  it,  namely, 
the  teachers  among  the  people,  who  should  be  to 
tiiem  those  whose  lips  should  preserve  instruc- 
tion, and  out  of  their  mouth  should  be  sought 
the  law  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth.  When  they  let 
God's  word  and  pure  instruction  slip,  the  people 
are  well-nigh  done  for.  Then  follow  all  the  pre- 
posterous things  which  Jeremiah  here  indicates 
by  the  mention  of  false  Prophets  and  bloody- 
minded  Priests."  Egid.  Hunnius.  [Calvin: 
"  This  passage  teaches  us  that  Satan  has  from  the 
beginning  polluted  the  sanctuary  of  God,  by 
means  even  of  sacred  names ;  for  the  prophetic 
office  was  honorable — so  also  was  the  sacerdotal. 
God  had  established  among  His  people  the  priest- 
hood, which  was,  as  it  were,  a  living  image  of 
Christ:  there  was  then  nothing  more  excellent 
than  the  priesthood  under  the  Law,  if  we  regard 
the  institution  of  God.  It  was  also  a  singular 
blessing  thatGod  promised  that  His  people  should 
never  be  without  Prophets.  As  then  Prophets 
and  Priests  were  two  eyes,  as  it  were,  in  the 
Church,  the  devil  turned  them  to  every  kind  of 
profanation.  This  example  then  reminds  us  how 
much  we  ought  to  watch,  lest  empty  titles  de- 
ceive us,  which  are  nothing  but  masks  or  spec- 
tres [phantoms].  When  we  hear  the  name  of 
Church  and  pastors,  we  ought  reverently  to  re- 
gard the  office  as  well  as  the  order  which  has 
proceeded  from  God,  provided  we  are  not  con- 
tent with  naked  titles,  but  examine  whether  the 
reality  also  corresponds.  Thus,  we  see  that  the 
whole  world  has,  for  many  ages,  degenerated 
from  true  religion;  under  what  pretext?  even 
this, — that  those  who  led  astray  miserable  souls 
boasted  that  they  were  the  vicars  of  Christ,  the 
successors  of  the  apostles,  so  that  they  still  arro- 
gantly boast  of  these  titles,  and  are  inflated  with 
them.  But  we  see  what  happened  in  the  time 
of  Jeremiah.  .  .  .  Prophets  and  Priests  had  de- 
stroyed the  very  Church  of  God." — Wordsworth  : 
"This  sin  of  the  Priests  and  Prophets  of  Jeru- 
salem, who  conspired  against  Jeremiah,  and  slew 
other  servants  of  God,  reached  its  height  when 
thei/  murdered  the  Just  One;  see  the  words  of 
Christ,  Matt,  xxiii.  31,  37;  and  of  the  first 
martyr,  Acts  vii.  52;  and  of  St.  Paul,  1  Thes.  ii. 
15;  and  those  of  James  the  Just,  who  himself 
was  murdered  by  them  at  Jerusalem,  Jam.  v.  6.'] 

19.  Ver.  13 — 15.  "Thence  follows  the  most 
pernicio\is  corruption,  and  from  that  again  the 
persecution  of  the  really  true  doctrine  and  of  its 
faithful  followers  and  servants.  .  .  .  This  is  always 
the  way  and  character  ecclesix  malignantium,  that 
is   to  say,  of  the   congregation  and   faction   of 


CHAP.  IV. 


173 


malicious  hypocrites,  inquisitors  and  conspir- 
ators, that  they,  from  perverted  love  for  their 
preconceived  error  and  prejudice,  are  excited 
and  inflamed  by  instigation  of  the  evil  spirit 
with  such  bitter  hatred  against  pure  doctrine 
and  its  faithful  defenders,  that  they  begin  to 
maintain  their  error  with  fist  and  sword,  and  to 
persecute  the  churches  of  God,  and  thus  sprinkle 
themselves  with  the  blood  of  the  righteous,  to 
ahed  which  they  incite  others,  and  give  them 
counsel  and  help  thereto.  .  .  .  Further,  as  those 
priests,  in  Jeremiah's  time,  covered  over  and 
adorned  all  their  falsehoods  and  tyranny  with 
the  pretence  of  the  succession  and  of  the  titles 
and  names  of  the  church,  on  which  account  they 
cried  out  against  Jeremiah,  Templum  Dei,  Tem- 
plum  Dei,  '  here  is  the  Temple  of  the  Lord,  here 
is  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  here  is  the  Temple  of 
the  Lord'  Jer.  vii.  4;  and,  again,  Jer.  xviii.  18, 
'  Come,  let  us  devise  devices  against  Jeremiah  ; 
for  the  law  shall  not  perish  from  the  priest,  nor 
counsel  from  the  wise,  nor  the  word  from  the 
Prophet;'  so  in  our  day,  the  constant  everlasting 
cry,  with  the  Pope  and  his  crowd,  that  they 
shout  against  us,  is — Church,  Church,  Church ! 
The  Pope  cannot  err  in  the  faith  and  articles  of 
religion,  for  he  is  a  successor  of  St.  Peter,  and 
sits  in  his  chair.  Yet  the  church  of  God  is  not 
so  bound  to  the  external  succession  or  order  but 
that  those,  who  certainly  were  in  the  orderly 
external  succession  of  the  Levitical  priesthood, 
established  by  God  Himself,  in  Jeremiah's  time, 
and  also  in  Christ's,  wandered  far,  far  away  from 
the  truth,  and  those  who  sat  in  Moses'  seat, 
namely  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  became  the 
bitterest  enemies  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and 
of  His  chosen,  holy  church  (Matt,  xxiii.).  What 
then  may  not  happen  in  the  case  of  the  Pope, 
who  can,  without  difficulty,  prove  that  God  in 
the  New  Testament  proposes  to  have  a  Pope  who 
shall  exalt  himself  over  all,  but  in  fact,  through 
St.  Paul,  has  designated  such  a  Primate  of  the 
Papacy  as  an  unfailing  sign  of  the  Antichrist  ? 
(2  Thess.  ii.  3,  4)."  Eqid.  Hunnius. 

20.  Vers.  13, 14.  "  Such  to-day  are  the  sangui- 
nary priests  of  Rome,  and  especially  the  Jesuits, 
who  wish  to  be  esteemed  priests  /car'  i^oxyv-  •  •  ■ 
Hence  those  famous  emblems  of  theirs  (Jesuitae  in 
Censura  Coloniensi,  Fol.  136):  'If  Luther  had 
been  removed  before  his  fortieth  year  by  fire  or 
sword,  or  if  others  were  removed  from  the  midst 
of  us,  the  whole  world  would  not  be  confounded 
by  such  abominable  dissensions.'  In  accordance 
with  these  sentiments  are  those  of  Andrew 
Fabricius  Leodius,  Counsellor  of  the  Princes  of 
Bavaria,  in  his  Preface  to  the  Harmony  of  Au- 
gustine's Confessions,  'Let  our  most  mighty  em- 
peror gird  his  sword  upon  his  thigh,  and  subdue 
these  heretics,  the  most  pernicious  enemies  of  the 
Christian  name.  The  shedding  of  Lutheran  blood 
is  useful,  for  by  that  means  the  members  are  pre- 
served entire.'  "  Forster. 

21.  Vers.  13, 14.  "  WhenGod  hasinview  thepu- 
rification  and  reformation  of  an  ecclesiastical  con- 
stitution, dependence  is,  least  of  all,  to  be  placed 
on  Theologians  by  jt^ro/Ms/ow,  and  their  assistance 
and  support,  or  even  only  their  comprehension 
and  assent.  AVhen  the  economy  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment came  to  an  end,  the  Priests  and  Scribes 
were  the  bitterest   enemies  and  persecutors  of 


Jesus  and  His  doctrine,  the  stupidest  in  the  whole 
world  to  understand  the  Scriptures  which  testi 
fled  of  Him.  Hirss  and  other  witnesses  for  tht 
Truth,  were  adjudged  to  the  funeral-pile,  not  by 
the  laity,  but  by  their  own  colleges  and  profes- 
sional associates.  How  was  it  in  this  respect  in 
Ldtheb's  time?  The  Princes  and  laity  were 
always  more  just,  more  tolerant,  more  easily 
convinced  of  the  truth,  more  prepossessed  in  its 
favor,  than  the  Bishops,  the  Scholars  and  the 
clergy  generally."  Doctor  Leidemit,  p.  44. 

22.  Ver.  15.  [Henry:  "They  upbraided  th« 
corrupt  Priests  and  Prophets,  with  their  pre- 
tended purity,  while  they  lived  in  all  manner  of 
real  iniquity.  You  were  so  precise,  you  would 
not  touch  a  Gentile,  but  cried.  Depart,  depart, 
stand  by  thyself,  I  am  holier  than  thou.  Is.  Ixv.  5. 
Thus  the  prosecutors  of  Christ  would  not  go  into 
the  judgment- hall,  lest  they  should  he  defiled.  But 
can  you  now  keep  the  Gentiles  from  touching 
you,  when  God  has  delivered  you  into  their 
hands?  When  you  fly  away  and  wander,  .  .  . 
these  serpents  will  not  be  charmed  or  enchanted 

.  .  .  no,  they  will  not  respect  the  persons  of  the 
priests,  nor  favor  the  elders." — Scott.  "The 
wickedness  of  those  who  are  by  office  engaged  to 
support  religion,  and  yet  betrary  her  interests,  is 
the  great  cause  of  national  judgments,  and  of  the 
ruin  of  flourishing  churches:  especially  when 
they  have  shed  the  blood  of  the  just  in  the  midst 
of  them.  They  who  have  thus  polluted  their  gar- 
ments, have  commonly  been  recompensed  in  the 
same  way;  and  rendered  an  execration  even  to 
the  vilest  of  mankind."] 

23.  Ver.  17.  "Hence  appears  the  truth  of 
David's  apothegms  in  Ps.  cxviii.  8,  9  ;  cxlvi.  3, 
4;  with  which  accords  Jer.  xvii.  5;"  as  well  as 
the  Son  of  Sirach,  vi.  7-9,  where,  on  the  margin, 
Ldther  wrote  these  beautiful  rhymes, 

Freunde  in  der  Noth 

Gehen  25  auf  ein  Loth. 

SoUt's  ein  barter  Stand  sein, 

Gehen  50  auf  ein  Quintlein."  Forster. 

"Pious  people  should,  according  to  this,  avoid 
putting  their  trust  in  men,  as  a  great  sin  and  a 
species  of  idolatry,  and  all  the  more  because  all 
such  trust  in  men  leads  us  into  danger,  finally 
disappoints  us  and  covers  us  with  shame.  For 
men  either  wish  not  to  help  us,  or  when  they  are 
willing  they  cannot,  or  when  they  promise  it, 
they  do  not  keep  their  promise,  for  their  very 
nature  is  vanity.  Hence  David  takes  occasion  to 
dissuade  us  from  trusting  in  men  or  gazing  after 
them,  when  he  says  in  Ps.  Ixii.,  Men  are  only 
vanity  ;  men  of  high  degree  are  wanting,  they 
weigh  less  than  nothing,  whatever  they  may 
be."  Egid.  HuNNirs. 

24.  Ver.  18.  "Here  occurs  a  proof  text  con- 
cerning the  fatal  end  and  period  of  atfairs,  which 
is  decreed,  as  our  text  bears  witness,  to  cities 
and  nations, — nay  to  all  things  iu  the  universe 
(Eccl.  iii..  Sir.  xiv.  20),  but  above  all  to  indi- 
vidual men  (Job  xiv.,  Ps.  cxxxix.  16).  That  end 
depends  indeed  on  the  foreknowledge  of  God,  but 
not  simply  and  absolutely  on  that  foreknowledge, 
but  as  that  foreknowledge  is  directed  witli  re- 
gard to  second  causes,  especially  with  reference 
to  piety  and  impiety,  as  is  attested  both  by  the 
promises  of  God,  such  as  that  added  to  the  luur'h 


174 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JERKMTAH. 


[fifth]  commandment  (Epb.  vi.  2.  3).  ivrul  hy  His 
threatenings,  Ps.  Iv.  24  (23).  Heuce  it  appears, 
that  the  end  of  human  life  is  not  so  definitely  or- 
dained as  by  fate,  because  it  can  be  prolonged 
by  the  practice  of  piety,  and  shortened  by  the 
practice  of  impiety."  Fouster. 

25.  Ver.  19.  [Calvin:  "When  the  hand  of 
God  is  against  us,  we  in  vain  look  around  in  all 
directions,  for  there  will  be  no  safety  for  us  on 
mountains;  nor  will  solitude  protect  us  in  the  de- 
sert. As.  then,  we  see  that  the  Jews  were  closed 
up  by  God's  hand,  so  when  we  contend  with  Him, 
we  in  vain  turn  our  eyes  here  and  there;  for, 
however,  we  may  for  a  time  entertain  good  hopes, 
yet  God  will  surely  at  last  disappoint  us.'"] 

2G.  Ver.  20.  In  the  Sept.  the  verse  reads; 
The  Spirit  of  our  countenance,  Christ  the  Lord  ivas 
taken  in  their  destruciion  [avveAijcfidri  'ev  ralq  6ia- 
(p-&opalQ),  of  whom  we  saic^.  In  his  shadow  will  ive 
dwell  among  the  nations.  Jerome  translates.  The 
Spirit  of  our  mouth,  Christ  the  Lord,  was  taken  in 
our  sins,  to  whom  we  said,  In  thy  shadow  icill  toe 
dwell  among  the  nations.  It  is,  therefore,  not  to 
be  wondered  at  that  this  passage  was  regarded 
by  the  ancients  generally  as  one  of  the  most  de- 
cided Messianic  prophecies.  "This  text,"  says 
Ghislek.,  "was  very  frequently  quoted  by  the 
early  Fathers,  and  was  interpreted  by  their  com- 
mon consent  of  Christ  the  Son  of  God."  A  col- 
lection of  the  various  patristical  expositions  may 
be  found  in  Ghisler.  They  make  chiefly  a  three- 
fold use  of  the  text.  1.  Tertulli.\n  proves  from 
it  against  Praxeas  (cap.  14),  that  the  Father 
could  in  no  sense  have  been  a  fades  [form  or 
manifestation]  of  the  Son,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
the  Son  was  a  fades  [manifestation]  of  the 
Father.  2.  They  recognize  in  this  passage  a 
clear  prediction  of  the  suiferings  of  Christ.  Thus, 
for  example,  Theodoret  says,  "Let  the  Jews 
say,  Whom  does  the  word  of  prophecy  call  Christ  ? 
"Who  of  those  called  Christs  by  them,  whether 
king,  or  prophet,  or  priest,  has  been  named  Lord 
((ciyjwf)?  But  they  could  not  point  to  such  an 
instance,  although  they  made  use  of  much  false- 
hood. It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  Propliet 
foretold  as  the  Saviour  and  our  Lord  (Kiipiov), 
Him  who  has  been  taken  by  them  through  the 
destruction  of  their  impiety."  [Theodoret 
adapts  his  language  to  that  of  the  Septuagint 
(see  above),  c!vAlr]<pdevTa  tto//  avri^v  fiia  tt/v  rf/g 
aae(idag  avTuv  diaf'&opav. — W.  H.  H.]  3.  But 
they  find  also  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles  predicted 
in  this  text.  Orioen,  particularly,  says  this 
(Horn,  on  Cant.  ii.  3)  with  reference  to  Luke  i.  35, 
"If,  therefore,  the  overshadowing  of  the  Most 
High  attended  the  conception  of  His  (Christ's) 
body,  it  is  reasonable  that  Hia  shadow  shall  give 
life  to  the  Gentiles." 

27.  Ver.  20.  "  The  question  arises,  how  could 
these  titles  (Messiah,  breath  of  the  people' s  nostrils, 
shadow),  apply  to  the  wicked  king  Zedekiah? 
They  apply  to  him,  not  by  reason  of  his  personal 
character,  but  1st,  by  reason  of  his  office,  which 
Duglit  to  have  been,  and  was  expected  by  the 
He  Drews  to  be  what  these  titles  import.  2d.  By 
n  asr)n  of  the  Antitype,  of  whom  David,  with  his 
P'l-iierity,  in  his  kingly  office  was  a  type.  But 
w.io  is  this  Antitype?  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
111  ■  son  of  David  according  to  the  flesh  (2  Tim. 
ii..  Rom.  i.),  that  anointed  one  of  the  Lord  (Luke 


ii.  26).  whose  breath  is  in  His  nostrils  (Is.  ii  22). 
and  who  is  our  shadow  against  the  heat  of  (Icni  s 
wrath  (Is.  xxv.  4),  and  to  whom  the  Lord  God 
gave  the  throne  of  His  Father  David  (Lukei.  32, 
33).  Magistrates  are  here  admonished  both  of 
the  authority  and  the  functions  of  theii  office. 
They,  too,  can  be  called  by  that  name  of  au. 
thority — the  anointed  of  the  Lord.  And  the  func- 
tions of  their  office  are,  that  they  may  be,  by 
their  counsel  and  efficient  aid,  the  breath  of  the 
nostrils, — and  such  a  shadow  as  that  prefigured 
in  the  tree  in  Dan.  iv.  7-9  (10-12)."   Forster. 

28.  Ver  21.  "  Here  is  a  proof-text  concerning 
eiTLxaLpEKaKia,  rejoicing  in  the  misfortunes  of 
others,  from  which  crime  Christians,  of  all  men, 
sliould  be  furthest  removed.  For  those  who  de- 
light in  the  misfortunes  of  others,  stripped  of  all 
humanity,  no  longer  imitate  the  tastes  and  dis- 
positions of  mankind,  but  those  of  the  devil." 
Forster. — Cup.  Fokster  remarks  here  that  the 
figure  of  a  cup  is  used  metaphorically  in  three 
ways.  1.  Cup  denotes  the  misfortune  of  the 
righteous  as  well  as  that  of  the  ungodly,  Ps. 
Ixxv.  2.  It  denotes  the  good  or  bad  fortune  of 
the  righteous,  Ps.  cxvi.  ;  Matt.  xx.  22;  xxiii. 
39,  42;  Mark  x.  38;  John  xviii.  11.  3.  It  de- 
notes the  misfortune  of  the  ungodly.  Is.  Ii.  17,22; 
■ler.  xxv.  15;  Lam.  iv.  21;  Ez.  xxiii.  31;  Hab. 
ii.  16;  Rev.  xiv.  10;  xvi.  19. 

29.  Ver.  21.  "  We  learn  from  this  that  God  has 
filled  their  certain  measure  of  trouble  for  all  men, 
and  He  lets  the  cup  pass  round  and  no  one  is 
overlooked,  as  it  is  written  in  Ps.  Ixxv.,  The 
Lord  has  a  cup  in  His  hand,  and  fills  it  full  of 
strong  wine,  and  pours  out  from  the  same,  but 
the  ungodly  must  drink  up  the  dregs.  That  is, 
the  pious  must  also  drink  of  the  cup  of  worm- 
wood, sorrow  and  pain.  But  Christ  has  pre- 
sented for  them  the  foretasted  cup  of  such  a  bit- 
ter, sour  potion,  and  with  the  wood  of  His  cross 
has  made  sweet  and  tolerable  for  His  own  to 
drink  the  bitter  waters  of  Mara,  as  is  beautifully 
and  figuratively  represented  in  Ez.  xv.  23-25. 
But  the  ungodly  must  at  last  taste  the  lees  and 
dregs  of  God's  wrath,  which  potion  constitutes 
their  final  and  utter  ruin."  Egip  Hi^nnius. 

30.  Ver.  22.  He  will  no  more  carry  thee 
avyay  into  captivity.  "  Here  it  is,  indeed, 
averred,  that  the  Lord  would  not  after  this  again 
cause  the  people  to  remove  from  the  land,  which 
certainly  seems  to  conflict  with  the  prolonged 
exile  which  the  Jews  at  this  day  are  enduring. 
But  the  answer  is  easy  and  obvious,  from  the 
rule  commonly  accepted  by  Theologians:  All 
God's  promises  are  to  be  understood  as  having 
the  condition  of  penitence  annexed  to  them." 
Forster. 

31.  Vers.  21-22.  "Zion's  punishment  will  some- 
time have  an  end,  because  God  in  spite  of  all  His 
judgments  upon  His  people,  will  yet  fulfil  His 
kingdom;  the  punishment  of  Edom,  on  the  con- 
trary, and  of  all  maliciously  disposed  worldly 
powers,  is  eternal  and  without  hope.  Heathen- 
dom, as  such,  cannot  be  regenerated,  notwith- 
standing all  God's  judgments  ;  it  can  only  perish, 
because  it  has  not  God's  word.  But  the  greater 
is  God's  punishment  of  His  people,  the  more  sure 
is  His  plun  for  their  salvation.  That  same  Christ, 
who  said,  '  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup 
pass  from  Me,'   and  sweat  blood,  yet  most  cer- 


CHAP.  IV. 


::5 


tainly  was  and  continued  of  His  own  accord  and 
by  His  own  act  in  the  bitterest  agony  of  death 
and  in  the  deepest  humiliation,  and  He  has 
brought  to  light  our  eternal  victory,  for  as  many 
of  us  as  abide  in  faith  on  His  word,  however 
helpless  at  present  we  may  be  in  ourselves.  Christ 
is  our  life  and  our  strength."  Diedrich. 

32.  Ver.  22.  [Calvin:  Peayer.  "Grant,  Al- 
mighty God,  that  as  Thou  seest  that  at  this  day 
the  mouths  not  only  of  our  enemies,  but  of  Thine 
also,  are  open  to  speak  evil, — 0  grant  that  no  oc- 
casion may  be  given  them,  especially  as  their 
slanders  are  cast  on  Thy  holy  name  ;  but  restrain 
Thou  their  insolence,  and  so  spare  us,  that 
though  we  deserve  to  be  chastised,  Thou  mayest 
yet  nave  regard  for  Thine  own  glory,  and  thus 
gather  us  under  Christ  our  Head,  and  restore 
Thy  scattered  Church,  until  we  shall  at  length 
be  all  gathered  into  that  celestial  kingdom,  which 
Thine  only-begotten  Son  our  Lord  has  procured 
for  us  by  His  own  blood.   Amen."] 

HOMILETICAL    AND   PRACTICAL. 

1.  Vers.  1-6.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by 
the  Chaldeans  an  example  of  God's  great  and  im- 
partial righteousness.  1.  Israel  was  among  the 
nations,  what  gold  is  among  the  metals  and  pre- 
cious stones  are  among  minerals,  vers.  1,  2.  2. 
But  the  sin  of  Israel  was  greater  than  the  sin  of 
Sodom,  ver.  6.  8.  Therefore  the  punishment  of 
Israel  was  severer  than  that  of  Sodom,  vers.  3-5. 

2.  Vers.  7-11.  The  relation  of  spiritual  hunger 
to  physical.  1.  The  relation  as  it  should  be.  a. 
Both  are  sanctioned,  Matt.  vi.  11,  82  ;  1  Tim.  vi. 
8.  b.  But  spiritual  exigency  should  have  the 
preference.  Matt.  vi.  33 ;  iv.  4  ;  xvi.  5-12 ;  Jno. 
vi.  27,  32-35.  2.  The  relation  as  it  should  not 
be,  Luke  xvi.  19-31.  3.  The  consequences  of 
the  perversion  of  the  right  relation,  a.  With 
regard  to  physical  hunger,  Lam.  iv.  7-11.  b. 
With  regard  to  spiritual  huiif^er,  Amos,  viii.  11, 
12 ;  Rev.  ii.  5. 

3.  Vers.  12-16.  The  warning,  which  John 
Baptist  gave  to  the  Jews,  Begin  not  to  say  within 
yourselves.  We  have  Abraham  to  our  Father 
(Luke  iii.  8),  concerns  all  persons  and  communi- 
ties, in  this  day,  who  believe  that  they  are  as- 
sured of  their  Divine  vocation.  How  well 
grounded  this  warning  was,  could  be  shown  at 
that  time  by  a  reference  to  the  first  destruction 
of  Jerusalem.  Let  us  avail  ourselves  of  the  same 
fact  in  order  to  impress  the  solemn  truth,  that  no 
Divine  vocation  can  save  us  from  eventual  destruction. 
For,  1.  Israel's  vocation  was  (a)  attested  by  the 
promises  given  to  the  Patriarchs;  (6),  confirmed 
by  many  proofs  of  actual  Divine  interposition  in 
their  behalf;  (c),  recognized  even  by  the  hea- 
then. 2.  This  Tocation  was  not  unconditional,  as 
carnal  Israel  imagined.  3.  The  non-fulfilment 
of  the  conditions,  for  which  the  Priests  and  Pro- 
phets were  chiefly  guilty,  ensured  as  a  conse- 


quence the  judgment  of  the  first  destruction. 
Conclusioti :  What  befell  Israel,  the  natural  olive 
tree,  may  much  more  readily  befall  that  which  is 
only  an  engrafted  branch  (Rom.  xi.  12)  of  the 
same. 

4.  Vers.  12-16.  77ie  great  responsibility  of  those 
possessed  of  spiritual  authority.  1.  The  duty  is 
imposed  upon  them,  of  directing  the  people  by 
word  and  example  to  keep  the  conditions  on 
which  the  Divine  promises  have  been  given.  2. 
To  them  belongs  the  guilt,  if  by  their  neglect, 
the  people  find  the  curse  instead  of  the  blessing. 

5.  Vers.  17-19.  Human  help  is  useless.  For,  1. 
It,  is  by  itself,  impotent.  2.  Those  who  depend 
upon  it,  (a),  experience  the  pain  of  disappointed 
expectation;   (6),  they  come  to  a  terrible  end. 

6.  Ver.  20.  The  reciprocal  duties  of  rulers  and 
subjects.  1.  The  duties  which  subjects  owe  to 
their  rulers.  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  the  Pro- 
phet, "  in  this  text  confers  an  honorable  title  on 
the  ungodly  king  Zedekiah,  that  he  calls  him  the 
Anointed  of  the  Lord,  and  here  a  beautiful  lesson 
is  taught  us,  with  what  respect  we  should  regard 
and  speak  of  our  superiors  and  rulers,  and  honor 
in  them  the  office,  which  God  has  conferred  upon 
them,  even  if  in  personal  character  they  are 
wicked  and  ungodly."  2.  The  duties  which 
rulers  owe  to  their  subjects.  Let  them  remember 
that  their  "  office,  in  the  words  of  the  Prophet 
should  be,  next  to  God  and  under  God,  a  refuge 
under  whose  shadow  their  poor  subjects  may 
live."  Egid.  Hunnius 

7.  Vers.  21,  22.  The  reciprocal  relation  of  those 
who  suffer  and  those  who  take  pleasure  in  the  suffer- 
ings of  others.  1.  That  one,  who  first  has  suffer- 
ing, will  afterwards  have  joy,  if  he  bear  his 
sutfering  in  the  right  way.  2.  That  one,  who 
first  has  malicious  pleasure  in  the  sufferings  of 
others,  will  at  last  have  sufferings  himself,  [a), 
because  he  has  calumniated  God  by  the  presump- 
tion that  He  was  not  influenced  by  love  in  His 
punishments;  (6),  because  he  has  been  destitute 
of  love  to  his  neighbor  and  thereby  has  provoked 
against  himself  the  sentence  of  retaliation 
(Mark  iv.  24). 

8.  Ver.  22.  [Henry:  "  1.  An  end  shall  be 
put  to  Zion's  troubles.  The  punishment  of  thine 
ijiiquity  is  accomplished,  0  daughter  of  Zion.  The 
troubles  of  God's  people  shall  be  continued  no 
longer,  than  till  they  have  done  the  work  for 
which  they  were  sent.  2.  An  end  shall  be  put 
to  Edom's  triumphs.  He  will  visit  thine  iniquity, 
0  daughter  of  Edom.  It  is  spoken  ironically  in 
ver.  21,  Rejoice  and  be  glad,  O  daughter  of  Edom. 
This  is  a  good  reason  why  we  should  not  insult 
over  any  who  are  in  misery,  because  we  our- 
selves also  are  in  the  body.  But  those  who 
please  themselves  in  the  calamities  of  God's 
church,  must  expect  to  have  their  doom,  as 
aiders  and  abettors,  with  them  that  are  instru- 
mental in  those  calamities.  Sooner  or  later,  sin 
will  be  visited  aud  diso»vered."] 


176  THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Chapter  V. 

DISTRESS   AND   HOPE   OF   THE   PRISONERS   AND   FUGITIVES  :    [EXPRESSED   IN  THE   FORM  OP   A  PBATaK; 
OR,   E.  v.,    A  PITIFUL    COMPLAINT  OF    ZION    IN    PRAYER    UNTO    QOD. W.   H.   H.] 

Ver.  1.     Remember,  Jehovah,  what  has  come  upon  us! 

Look  down  and  see  our  reproach. 
Ver.  2.     Our  inheritance  has  fallen  to  strangers, 

Our  houses  to  aliens. 
Ver.  3.     We  have  become  orphans,  without  father, 

Our  mothers — as  widows. 
Ver.  4.     Our  water  we  have  drunk  for  money, 

Our  wood  comes  for  a  price. 
Ver.  5.     On  our  necks  we  have  been  pursued ; 

We  have  been  weary, — there  was  no  rest  for  ui. 
Ver.  6.     Towards  Egypt  have  we  stretched  the  hand, — 

Towards  Assyria, — to  be  satisfied  with  bread. 
Ver.  7.     Our  fathers  sinned.     They  are  no  more  ; 

We  have  borne  their  iniquities. 
Ver.  8.     Servants  have  ruled  over  us : 

There  was  none  to  deliver  from  their  hand. 
Ver.  9.     At  the  peril  of  our  lives  we  get  our  bread, 

Because  of  the  sword  of  the  desert. 
Ver.  10.  Our  skin  has  been  parched  as  an  oven. 

Because  of  the  ragings  of  hunger. 

Ver.  11.  Women  in  Zion  have  been  humbled, — 

Virgins — in  the  cities  of  Judah. 
Ver.  12.  Princes  have  been  hung  up  by  the  hand : 

The  persons  of  Elders  have  not  beeo  honored. 
Ver.  13.  Young  men  have  carried  mill-stones; 

And  boys  have  fallen  under  [burdens  of]  wood. 

Ver.  14.  Elders  have  forsaken  the  gate, — 

Young  men — their  music. 
Ver.  15.  Ceased  has  the  joy  of  our  heart; 

Our  dance  has  been  changed  to  mourning. 
Ver.  16.  The  crown  has  fallen  from  our  head. 

Woe  unto  us  !  for  we  have  sinned. 
Ver.  17.  For  this  our  heart  has  become  faint ; 

For  these  things  our  eyes  have  become  dim. 
Ver.  18.  As  to  Mount  Zion,  which  has  become  desolate. 

The  foxes  have  walked  upon  it ! 

Ver.  19.  But  Thou,  Jehovah,  reignest  forever ; 

Thy  throne  is  from  generation  to  generation. 
Ver.  20.  Wherefore  should'st  Thou  always  forget  us, 

And  abandon  us  for  length  of  days  ? 
Ver.  21.  Turn  us,  Jehovah,  unto  Thee,  and  we  shall  turn; 

Renew  our  days  as  of  old  ; — 
Ver.  22.  If  Thou  hast  not  utterly  rejected  us, 

And  art  wroth  against  us  exceedingly ! 

ANALYSIS. 

The  iuiject  is  chipfly  composed  of  the  particular  incidents  of  those  grievous  days  which  followed  the  capture 
of  Jerusalem.  The  Poet  lets  the  people  speak,  yet  not  as  an  ideal  female  person,  but  in  the  first  person 
plural  as  a  concrete  multitude.      The  Son;/  is  divided  into  an  introduction,  ver.  1,  two  principal  parts. 


CHAP.  V.   1-22. 


177 


vers.  2-7,  8-16,  and  a  conclusion,  vers.  17-22.  In  the  introduction,  ver.  1,  the  Lord  is  entreated  to 
regard  the  sorrows  that  had  befallen  Zion  [the  peoplel .  In  the  following  two  principal  parts,  vers.  2- 1 6, 
these  sorrows  are  described  in  detail.  The  first  part  embraces  vers.  2-7.  All  their  property,  fixed  and 
movable,  is  seized  by  the  enemy,  ver.  2 ;  families  are  scattered,  fathers  have  disappeared,  mothers  are 
as  widows,  ver.  3 ;  the  captives  receive  no  subsistence,  they  must  buy  what  they  need,  though  as  the 
product  of  their  own  land  it  is  really  their  own  properly,  ver.  4;  on  the  march  to  Babylon,  they  are 
driven  beyond  their  strength,  and  no  rest  is  allowed  them,  ver.  5.  Besides  all  this,  the  w-hole  people 
do  not  even  remain  together.  Whilst  one  party  is  compelled  to  throw  itself  into  the  arms  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, another  party  belotiga  to  Assyria;  both  are  in  such  straits  as  to  rejoice  if  able  only  to  prolong 
their  lives,  ver.  6.  But  this  great  misfortune  is  caused  by  the  sins  of  the  fathers,  the  consequences  of 
which  now  their  posterity  have  to  bear,  ver.  7.  The  second  principal  part  embraces  rera.  8-16. 
Whilst  those  forced  to  Babylon  groan  under  the  rods  of  the  rough  servants,  who  are  their  driver.t.  ver. 
8,  those  who  wander  to  Egypt,  must  seek  for  subsistence  amidst  constant  danger  from  (he  robbers  of 
the  desert,  ver.  9:  both  parties  suffer  the  consuming  pangs  of  hunger,  ver.  10.  To  this  is  now  added 
a  recital,  partly  the  recollection  of  what  had  already  been  endured,  partly  an  exhibition  of  what  tliey 
still  experienced,  of  the  sufferings  from  which  no  class  of  the  population  was  exempted :  women  have 
been  dishonored,  ver.  11 ;  noble  princes  hung  up  or  outrageously  ill-treated,  ver.  12  ;  young  men  com- 
pelled to  carry  heavy  hand-mills,  and  boys  loads  of  ivood,  ver.  13.  Sitting  in  the  gate — the  delight  and 
glory  of  old  men,  and  playing  on  stringed  instruments — the  pleasure  of  young  men,  have  come  to  an  end, 
ver.  14.  In  gefieral,  among  all  classes,  deep  mourning  has  succeeded  to  pleasure  and  joy,  ver.  15. 
The  crown  of  glory  has  fallen  from  the  head  of  Zion,  and,  verily,  those  who  suffer  this,  are  obliged  to 
acknowledge,  that  it  has  happened,  not  merely  because  their  fathers  had  sinned  (ver.  7),  but  because 
they  themselves  have  sinned,  ver.  16.  The  conclusion  contains  a  prayer,  to  which  vers.  17,  18  are 
introductory.  In  these  verses  it  is  declared,  that  all  the  affliction  of  the  Israelites  culminates  in  the 
destruction  of  the  Sanctuary.  But  this  thought  suggests  the  encouragement,  which  the  Poet  now  pre- 
sents in  his  prayer ;  although  the  external  Sanctuary  is  destroyed.  Thou  Thyself,  0  Lord,  remainest 
for  ever,  ver.  19.  Wherefore  shouldest  Thou  forget  and  forsake  Thy  people  for  ever?  ver.  20. 
Lead  us  back  to  Thyself,  that  we  may  be  again  what  loe  have  been  in  former  times,  ver.  21.  This 
will  be  done,  for  it  is  not  to  be  supposed,  that  Thou  canst  have  utterly  rejected  us,  ver.  22.  [Ver.  1, 
introductory  ;  vers.  2-10,  descriptive  of  general  suffering  from  oppression  and  ivant  of  necessaries  of 
life;  vers.  11-18,  instances  of  individual  suffering;  vers.  14-18,  effect  on  the  feelings  and  senti- 
ments of  the  people ;  vers.  19-22,  the  prayer. — W.  H.  H.] 


PRELIMINARY    NOTE    0«    CH.  V. 

This  chapter  is  not  acrostic.  Yet  it  is  evident 
from  the  agreement  of  the  number  of  the  verses 
with  the  number  of  the  letters  of  the  alphabet, 
that  the  chapter  should  be  regarded  as  belonging 
to  the  four  preceding  ones  as  a  member  of  the 
same  family.  The  acrostic  is  wanting,  because 
the  contents  are  in  prose.  The  Poet  would 
make  apparent,  even  in  the  external  form,  the 
decrescendo  movement,  which  we  perceive  from 
the  third  chapter  onward.  Were  there  not  22 
verses,  this  chapter  might  be  regarded  as  an  en- 
tirely disconnected  supplement.  But  the  number 
of  verses  is  a  vinculum,  that  in  a  way  even  ex- 
ternally observable,  unites  this  prosaic  chapter 
with  the  preceding  poetical  ones. 

[Various  reasons  may  be  given  for  the  absence 
of  the  acrostic  in  this  chapter.*  1.  There  may 
be  something  in  the  notion  that  the  alphabetical 
structure  was  not  allowed  to  embarrass  freedom 
of  thought  and  expression  in  prayer  (Gerlach, 
Adam  Clarke).  2.  We  may  suppose  tlie  writer 
felt  less  need  of  the  artificial  restraint  in  con- 
trolling his  feelings  and  restricting  their  expres- 
sion. It  is  not  true  that  this  Song  "  is  of  less 
impassioned  character "  than  the  others,  as 
Wordsworth  says,  but  it  is  true,  as  he  further 
says,  that  "the  writer,  being  less  agitated  by/ 
emotions,   and   having   tranquillized  himself  by 

*  [The  opinion  of  Bertholf,  that  the  Prophet  "either  hiid 
no  more  time  to  spend  in  the  troublesome  olioice  of  initial 
words,  or  that  he  g:re\v  tired  of  this  trifling  process  and  de- 
liberately relinquished  it,"  (quoted  by  Gerlach  in  his  Intr. 
p.  X.),  is  sufficiently  refuted,  not  only  by  its  own  irreverence, 
but  by  what  has  been  said  in  reference  to  the  acrostic  in  Ad- 
ditional Remarks  to  Intr.  pp.  23,  24. — W.  II.  H.j 
12 


the  utterance  of  his  sorrow,  and  by  meditations 
on  the  attributes  of  God,  did  not  need  the  help 
of  that  artificial  appliance  to  support  and  control 
him."  Besides,  new  restraints  are  imposed  upon 
the  writer  in  this  Song,  which  more  than  supply 
any  assistance  derived  from  the  alphabetical  curb 
in  the  preceding  songs.  The  verses  are  reduced 
from  three  and  two  members  each,  to  a  single 
member,  and  this  not  only  balanced  by  a  cesura 
or  pause  as  in  the  other  songs,  but  composed  of 
corresponding  parallelisms  of  ideas  and  expres- 
sions. To  have  added,  to  the  production  of  these 
distinct  and  emphatic  parallelisms,  the  difiiculties 
of  the  acrostic,  could  have  g'erved  no  useful  or 
artistic  purpose.  3.  In  the  last  fact  referred  to, 
the  introduction  of  parallelisms  of  thought  and 
sentiment,  may  be  found  the  most  satisfactory 
reason  for  the  absence  of  the  acrostic.  As  long 
as  the  parallelisms  were  merely  rhythmical,  as 
in  the  first  four  songs,  the  alphabetical  index 
served  a  good  purpose  in  rounding  off  and  de- 
fining the  successive  verses.  Now  it  is  no  longer 
needed.  We  find  here  then  an  argument  in  favor 
of  the  theory  advanced,  in  Additional  Remarks 
to  the  Introduction,  p.  23,  in  reference  to  the 
relation  of  the  Acrostic  to  rhythmical  parallel- 
isms. 

Is  this  chapter  poetry  or  prose  ?  Dr.  Naeoels- 
bach  says,  "  the  acrostic  is  wanting  because  the 
contents  are  in  prose."*  He  certainly  cannot 
mean   that   the  chapter  is   prose,    because    tli  ; 

*  [We  cannot  misunderstand  our  author,  for  besides  speak- 
ing of  this  :'S  a  "  prosaic  chapter  "  and  comparing  it  with  tiie 
preceding  "poetiral  chapters'"  (see  also  Intr.  j.)p.  3,  4,  r>\  ".u-, 
puts  his  new  translation  into  good  German  prose — while  he 
has  given  us  most  lieautiful  metrical  translations  of  the  other 
four  chapters. — ^V.  H.  H.J 


178 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


acrostic  is  wanting ;  and  yet  unless  he  implies 
this,  he  has  not  even  suggested  a  reason  for  this 
most  extraordinary  assertion.  This  chapter  has 
poetical  characteristics,  that  the  preceding  chap- 
ters do  not  possess;  besides  having  all  that  they 
do  possess,  except  the  acrostic,  which  in  itself  is 
unpoetical.  1.  It  has  that  unfailing  mark  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  of  which  the  preceding  chapters 
are  nearly  destitute,  parallelisms  of  thought,  one 
half  the  verse  exactly  and  beautifully  corres- 
ponding in  its  sentiment  and  form  of  construc- 
tion to  the  preceding  half,  and  successive  verses 
connected  by  underlying  analogies,  comparisons, 
or  relations,  such  as  parallelisms  involve.  2.  The 
language  is  so  unmistakably  rhythmical  as  to 
be  almost  metrical.  The  first  line  of  each  verse 
never  consists  of  more  than  four  words,  nor  of 
less  than  three,  counting  compound  words  as 
one.  The  second  line  never  consists  of  more 
than  three  words  (unless  in  two  instances,  where 

vh  ver.  12,  and  ''3  or  W  ver.  16,  may  be  joined 
to  the  word  following  themj,  and  if  it  have  two 
words  only,  those  two  are  in  tliat  case  invariably 
long  words.  In  this  song,  if  anywhere  in  Hebrew 
poetry,  we  can  detect  evidences  of  such  metrical 
feet  as  the  Hebrew  language  was  capable  of.  3. 
There  is  throughout  the  Song  such  assonance  as 
cannot  be  accidental,  and  could  oidy  be  allowed 
in  poetry.  The  Song  is  full  of  rhymes.  This  may 
not  justify  us  in  calling  it  a  "strictly  rhymed 
Song"  (as  does  Bellerman,  Melr.  d.  Hebr.,  S.  220, 
quoted  by  Gerlach),  but  it  is  certainly  a  result 
of  the  evident  regard  to  assonance  in  the  choice 
of  words.  Thus  in  this  Song  that  is  composed 
of  only  44  short  lines,  1  occurs  55  times,  and  44 
times  as  final  letter  of  words;  D  occurs  21  times 
as  final  letter  of  words:  out  of  the  134  words 
the  Song  contains,  65,  or  only  2  less  than  one 
half,  end  in  either  1  or  D-  24,  or  more  than  half 
of  the  lines,  end  with  1,  17  end  with  -U,  9  end 
with  D-  In  9  verses  (1,  2,  4,  5,  11,  12,  15,  16, 
17)  both  lines  end  with  the  same  letter  (or  let- 
ters) and  vowel  point.  28  lines  end  with  the 
same  letter  that  terminates  one  (or  both)  of 
tlie  lines  of  the  verse  immediately  preceding  or 
following.  Other  evidences  of  a  studied  asso- 
nance are  apparent :  such  as  2X,  mjO,  as  ter- 
minations of  ver.  3  ;  1J''3"'p,  ^y^^_,  first  words 
in  the  lines  of  ver.  4  ;  ''.J30  as  first  word  in 
second  lines  of  verses  9,  10,  making  a  parallel- 
ism in  sound  as  well  as  in  sense ;  lilJJU/,  nOtJ/,  in 

T  T         -T 

near  relation  and  parallelism,  vers.  14,  15,  and 
possibly  an   equivalent  for  failure  of  rhyme  in 

ver.  14 ;  ^JS/j  as  last  word  in  first  lines  of  vers. 
15,  17;  etc.  So  obvious  is  the  prevailing  paro- 
nomasia in  this  Song,  tliat  the  remark  has  been 
made,  that  the  Song  appears  like  'the  effort  of  a 
youth  playing  with  words'  (quoted  by  Gerlach). 
To  the  slur  contained  in  tliis  remark,  it  may  be 
replied,  tliat  no  unskilled  youth,  even  if  capable 
of  choosing  his  words  so  artfully,  could  liave  nr- 
ranged  them  so  as  to  give  both  harmony  and 
sense,  and  thus  producs  a  poem  equal  in  fervor, 
force  and  beauty  to  this.  But  the  fact  that  such 
an  insult  could  be  offered  (.o  this  Song,  proves 
*hat  it  is  written  in  a  style  only  adopted 
in  poetry.     4.   In  spirit  as  well  as  in  form,  this 


chapter  is  poetry,  and  that  of  the  highest  order. 
There  is  nothing  prosaic  about  it,  not  even  in  th« 
recital  of  hard  facts  and  detailed  incidents.  As 
the  Song  proceeds  the  lyre  is  tuned  to  higher 
chords  than  even  inspired  minstrels  often  reach, 
and  vers.  14-19,  are  so  exquisitely  beautiful  that 
we  cannot  imagine  anything  to  excel  them  in  all 
the  Songs  of  Heaven  and  earth.  I  cannot  repress 
the  expression  of  these  sentiments  and  be  a  silent 
instrument  in  giving  to  American  readers,  this 
strange  opinion  of  an  eminent  man,  that  this 
chapter  is  a  bit  of  prose  writing,  tacked  on  to  a 
splendid  poem,  by  the  poor  expedient  of  its  con- 
taining twenty-two  verses  (though  it  is  something 
new  to  write  prose  in  verses).  Were  I  more  dif- 
fident of  my  own  judgment,  I  might  take  refuge 
umler  the  shadow  of  Dean  Milman,  who  in  culling 
from  the  Lamentations  what  he  regards  as  speci- 
mens of  "the  deepest  pathos  of  poetry,"  gives 
us  a  metrical  translation  of  nearly  the  whole  of 
the  5th  chapter  (14  out  of  the  22  verses),  while 
he  selects  only  three  verses  from  chap,  i.,  eight 
verses  from  chap,  ii,,  three  verses  from  chap,  iv., 
and  none  fromchap.  iii.  It  is  to  be  inferred  that 
in  his  judgment,  the  fifth  Song  excels  in  its  poetry 
the  four  Songs  that  precede  it.  I  agree  with 
him. 

That  the  only  connection  of  this  chapter  with 
the  preceding  four  chapters  is  found  in  the  cor- 
responding number  of  its  verses,  without  which 
it  might  be  regarded  as  a  supplement  to  those 
chapters,  but  not  as  an  integral  part  of  the  Poem, 
is  an  opinion  that  will  not  sustain  examination. 
1.  It  is,  as  we  have  seen,  lyrical  in  its  structure, 
and  thus  assimilated  to  the  preceding  Songs.  2. 
The  Poem  could  not  end  with  the  fourth  cliapter. 
Such  an  ending  were  too  painfully  abrupt.  Even 
as  it  is,  the  burden  of  Edom  seems  to  be  intruded 
at  that  place,  and  we  only  comprehend  it,  when 
we  know  that  it  was  Jeremiah's  habit  to  repre- 
sent the  security  of  the  church  of  God,  by  de- 
picting the  destruction  of  its  enemies.  But  to 
end  the  Poem  with  that  threat  against  Edom, 
would  seem  to  be  impossible.  Something  more 
is  needed,  and  that  something  is  just  what  we 
have  in  the  prayer  of  chap.  v.  3.  The  only  way 
to  account  for  the  omission  of  the  usual  prayer 
(see  i.,  ii.,  iii.)  at  the  end  of  the  4th  Song,  is 
by  the  fact  that  its  omission  was  to  be  more  than 
supplied  by  the  5th  Song.  Here  is  the  groove 
into  which  the  fifth  Song  is  dovetailed  so  securely, 
that  we  cannot  break  the  connection,  without 
marring  the  harmony  and  completeness  of  the 
whole  poem.  4.  The  structure  of  this  last  Song, 
gives  the  last  needed  touch  to  the  manifest  unity 
of  the  whole  poem.  The  preceding  chapters  may 
be  regarded  as  composing  a  poem  not  unlike  the 
modern  ode,  in  which  great  liberties  in  the 
versification  are  allowed.  But  the  Ode,  com- 
plete in  its  main  parts,  is  wound  up  at  last  with 
a  Hymn  of  prayer  to  God,  constructed  according 
to  the  strictest  rules  of  lyrical  poetry,  metrical 
and  harmonious,  and  forming  an  apt  conclusion 
because  it  recites  all  that  has  been  before  said, 
briefly  and  forcibly, — sums  up,  as  it  were,  the 
whole  case,  and  leaves  it  in  the  hands  of  God. 
Finally  Dr.  Naegelsbach's  beautiful  fiction  of 
a  crescendo  and  a  decrescendo  movement,  does  not 
need  the  flattening  out  of  the  Poem  into  a  piece  of 
prose  writing,  attached  to  what  precedes  only  bj 


CHAP.  V.  2-10. 


173 


the  number  of  its  verses.  It  is  enough  that  the  I  plaintive  lyre  pours  forth  a  final  strain  of  im- 
decrescendo  movement,  in  the  music  of  the  Poem,  passioned,  yet  melting  and  delicious  harmony.—. 
is   arrested  at  the  close,   and  the  Poet's   most   W.  H.  H.] 


V.  1. 
1       Remember,  O  Lord,  -what  is  come  upon  us :  consider  and  behold  our  reproach. 

TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  1. — I-"  13?.    See  Is.  xxxviii.  3;  Mic.  vi.  5  ;  Job  iv.  7.— £3''3n-    See  i.  11.    [Blatnet  :   "  Forty-one  MSS.  and  fout 
:  T    •  - 

Editions  read  with  the  Masora  DtO'jn,  with  the  n  paragogic."     Henderson:  "The  H  thus  added  to  the  Imperative,  ex- 

T   ■  - 
presses  the  emotion  of  ardent  desire  on  the  part  of  the  speaker."] — ^jri3in.    See  iii.  30  ;  Ps.  Ixxiv.  22;  Ixxxix.  51. 


EXEGETICAL    AND   CRITICAL. 

Ver.  1.  Remember,  O  LORD,  what  is 
come  upon  us, — Rememhpr,  Jehovah,  what  has 
befallen  m, — consider  and  behold — look  and 
sec — our  reproach. — [The  word  translated  con- 
sider (see  i.  11),  when  followed  by  DN"!,  to  see, 
means  to  direct  attention  to  a  thing  in  order  to 
see  it.      Blayney   and    Noyes    translate,    Look 


doivn  and  see — which  gives  the  sense,  but  the 
word  does  not  express  direction,  but  the  intensity 
of  looking. — W.  H.  H.]  This  first  verse  consti- 
tutes the  introduction.  It  contains  the  prayer, 
that  Jehovah  would  regard  the  affliction  and  re- 
proach fallen  on  Zion[the  people],  some  features 
of  which  the  Poet  recounts  in  what  follows.  The 
Poet  presents  himself  before  God,  as  it  were,  and 
all  that  follows  is  to  be  regarded  as  addressed  to 
God. 


V.  2-10. 


2,  3       Our  inheritance  is  turned  to  strangers,  our  houses  to  aliens.     We  are  orphans 

4  and  fatherless,  our  mothers  are  as  widows.     We  have  drunken  our  water  for  money; 

5  our  wood  is  sold  unto  us.     Our  necks  are  under  persecution :  we  labour,  and  have 

6  no  rest.     We  have  given  the  hand  to  the  Egyptians,  and  to  the  Assyrians,  to  be 

7  satisfied  with  bread.     Our  fathers  have  sinned,  and  are  not :  and  we  have  borne 

8  their  iniquities.     Servants  have  ruled  over  us :  there  is  uoue  that  doth  deliver  us 

9  out  of  their  hand.     We  gat  our  bread  with  the  peril  of  our  lives,  because  of  the 
10  sword  of  the  wilderness.     Our  skin  was  black  like  an  oven,  because  of  the  terrible 

famine. 


TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  2. — nbn J,  frequent  in  Jeremiah,  ii.  7  ;  iii.  19  ;  xii.  7-9,  etc. — ^DHJ,  see  i.  20  ;  iv.  6.  Jeremiah  uses  in  this  sense 
JD  J)  ^i- 12.  This  word  represents  the  transfer  of  property  to  another  owner,  in  Is.  Ix.  5  also. — D''^  T  Jeremiah  uses  frequently, 

-T  "T 

ii.  25  ;  iii.  13;  v.  19,  etc. — D'^DJ  Jeremiah  uses  only  once,  in  the  fem.,  n^"UJ   \2^,  "•  21. 
•  :  T  T  •  :  T   I V  v 

Ver.  3. — DlH',  Jer.  v.  28  ;  vii.  6,  etc. :  in  Lamentations  only  here. — ^X   PN-     See  Is.  xlvii.  1 ;  Jer.  ii.  32 ;  my  (?r.,  §106, 

T  T       I     •■ 

3.    [r  J<=ohne,  witlwut,  Naegels.  Gr.]    The  K'ri,  VXI  is  unnecessary. 

Ver.  4.— :| yD''0,  Jer.  vi.  7 ;  xlvi.  7  ;  I.  38.— flpD,  Jer.  vi.  30,  eJc— D"'^JT,  Jer.  v.  14 ;  vii.  18,  «te.— TTIO,  Jer.  xv.  13.— 
^N3"-  EWA.LD  translates,  our  wood  is  sold  for  silver.  He  also  takes  Xi3  in  tl^e  sense  of  the  Latin  vtneo,  venire.  But  I  d« 
rot  think  that  S?13  is  ever  used  in  this  sense.  At  the  most,  only  1  Kings  s.  14  could  be  cited,  where  the  word  is  used  with 
reference  to  the  revenues. 

Ver.  5. — INiy,  see  i.  14. — HTT,  Jer.  xix.  18;  Lam.  i.  6:  in  the  sense  of  driving,  cliasing,  the  word  is  not  elsewhere  found 
In  Jeremiah.  [It  is  doubtful  if  that  is  its  sense  here.— W.  H.  H.] — ^y,  Jer.  xlv.  3,  which  place  is  very  closely  allied  in 
•ense  to  our  place  here,  Ii.  58. — nj^D-    The  Hophal  is  found  only  here :  Jeremiah  uses  only  the  Hiphil  n'in>  xiv.  9 ;  xxviL 

11  ;  xlUi.  6. 

Ver.  6. D''^VO  and  TItJ'X  are  to  be  taken  as  Ace.  localis,  in  answer  to  the  question  whither?    See  my  Gr.,  J  70,  6. 

JThere  is  no  necessity  of  supposing  an  ellipsis  of  the  preposition  7,  as  Henderson  ;  nor  any  grammatical  reason  for  tran» 
lating,  0  Egypt,  O  Assyria,  as  Blayney  does,  diverting  the  prayer  from  God  to  these  heathen  nations.— W.  H.  H.]— _j?3ijr, 

■ee  iii.  30. 

Ver.  7. OyN-     Four  times  in  this  chapter,  the  Masorites  would  read  1,  uhere  it  is  wanting  in  tl»'     Xt,  rerg.  3,  5,  7 


180 


THE  LV'IENTATIONS  OP  JEREMIAH. 


tvxice.  But  the  author  generally  uses  Vav  sparingly.  Only  once  is  the  second  clause  of  the  verse  begun  with  V  In  thit 
▼erse,  an  error  might  arise  from  its  use.  If  it  were  DJ' XI,  some  would  be  led  to  understand  their  non-existence,  as  the  con- 
sequence of  their  sinning.  See  Jer.  x.  20.  But  this  cannot  be  the  author's  meaning;  for  he  immediately  asserts  that  th» 
generation  now  living  has  to  bear  the  punishment.  Their  being  no  longer  in  existence,  therefore,  is  the  simple  result  of 
the  course  of  nature. — SjD  Jeremiah  never  uses.    It  represents  bearing  the  burden  of  sin,  Is.  liii.  4,  11 ;  comp.  xlvi.  4,  7. — 

-  T 

?ij?,  see  ii.  14. 

Yer.  8. — bti'O,  Jer.  xxii.  30  ;  xxx.  21,  etc. — p'lQ,  see  Gen.  xxvii.  40 ;  Ps.  vii.3  ;  cxxxvi.  24 ;  Jeremiah  never  uses  the  wuid, 

neither  does  it  occur  again  in  the  Lamentations. 

Ver.  9.— IJiySJS  (3  pretii,  see  my  Gr.,  g  112,  5  a).  See  i.  11 ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  17  ;  1  Chron.  xi.  19.— J{'3n,  see  i.  21.  [W» 
have  the  future  here,  as  the  historical  imperfect,  implying  the  recurrence  of  what  is  related.— W.  H.  H.]— Qn  7,  i.  H.— 
*131iDn  31  n,  which  can  only  indicate  the  robber  tribes  of  the  desert  (Gen.  xvi.  12),  is  found  only  here.  [Calvin  translates 
3"in,  drought,  and  wonders  that  any  one  ever  thought  of  calling  it  sword.  It  may  have  the  meaning  of  drought  in  Dent, 
xxviii.  22,  though  even  there  E.  V.  has  sword.  lu  this  verse,  all  the  Versions,  and  commentators  generally,  translate  sword. 
— W.  II.  H.] 

Ver.  10. — '^'|22  occurs  only  in  Niphal,  and  besides  here  only  in  three  places.  Gen.  xliii.  30;  1  Kings  iii.  26;  Hos.  xi.  8. 

The  sense  is  calef actum,  adustum  esse  (see  lon,  i-  20;  ii.  11).    The  plural  shows  that  ^^^^  is  regarded  collectively.     [It  also 

-  T 

shows  the  preference  in  this  Song  for  termination  in  V  Yet,  "  fifty-eight  MSS.,  and  the  Soncin.  Bible  read  lyil^  in  the 
plural  "  (Henderson).- W.H.  H.]— Ilj;,  see  iv.  8.— "^^Ijp,  see  Hos.  vii.  6,  7,  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah,  [nor  any  equivalent 
for  it.— W.  H.  H.]— niiJ^ST,  Kstus  vehemens,  Jeremiah  never  uses.    It  is  found,  besides  here,  only  in  Ps.  cxix.  53 ;  xi.  6. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

[Vers.  2-10  describe  the  distressed  condition 
«f  the  people  generally,  and  especially  the  suf- 
ferings caused  by  deticiency  in  the  necessaries 
of  life.  Vers.  2,  3,  describe  their  disinherited 
and  bereaved  condition. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  2.  Our  inheritance  is  turned  to 
strangers,  our  houses  to  aliens — foreigners. 
[Calvin  :  "  The  land  had  been  promised  to 
Abraham  four  hundred  years,  before  his  chil- 
dren possessed  it ;  we  know  that  this  promise  had 
been  often  repeated,  'This  land  shall  be  to  you 
for  an  inheritance.'  .  .  .  No  land  has  ever  been 
given  to  men  in  so  singular  a  way  as  the  land  of 
Canaan  to  the  posterity  of  Abraham.  As,  then, 
this  inheritance  had  been  for  so  many  ages  pos- 
sessed by  the  chosen  people,  Jeremiah  does  not 
without  reason  complain  that  it  was  turned  over 
to  aliens."~\ — Our  houses  to  aliens.  Many  ex- 
positors (Vaiuingkr  for  instance)  understand 
from  the  second  clause  of  this  verse,  that  not  all 
the  houses  of  Jerusalem  had  been  destroyed,  but 
those  which  still  remained  were  at  the  disposal 
of  the  Chaldeans;  which  is  the  same  as  saying 
that  they  dwelt  in  them.  They  appeal  to  2 
Chron.  xxxvi.  19,  where  the  de.struction  of  the 
palaces  only  is  spoken  of.  Although  in  Jer.  Iii. 
13;  2  Kings  xxv.  9,  it  is  expressly  said  that  all 
the  houses  of  Jerusalem,  jvere  destroyed,  yet,  they  say, 
this  is  to  be  regarded  as  merely  a  rhetorical  hyper- 
bole, since  elsewhere  the  houses  of  the  great  [the 
nobility]  are  alone  specified.  Compare  Jer.  Iii.  13. 
We  have,  however,  no  evidence  that  the  Chalde- 
ans inhabited  Jerusalem  after  its  destruction ; 
and  Nehemiah  (ii.  3)  mourns  that  Jerusalem  is 
nmn,  desolate,  and  its  gates  burned  with  fire. 
tVhen  it  is  said  here  that  the  houses  were  given 
up  to  the  Chaldeans,  this  can  only  mean  that  they 
disposed  of  them  as  they  pleased.  In  fact,  they 
destroyed  the  bouses,  but  carried  away  the  mov- 
able property  found  in  them  as  booty.  Although 
the  houses  and  their  contents  could  be  designated 
as  an  inheritance,  yet  by  n'lnj,  inheritance,  which 


is  here  distinguished  from  the  houses,  the  land  is 
especially  intended  (see  Lev.  xx.  24;  Num.  xvi. 
14;   xxxvi.  7-9;  Jos.  xiii.  23  ;   etc.).    We  may  say, 

therefore,    that  TXl  n  J,    inheritance,    and    D^"^3, 

'  T-:|-'  '  ■  T 

houses,  are  related  to  each  other  substantially  as 
fixed  and  movable  property. 

Ver.  3.   We  are  orphans  and  fatherless — 

2ve  have  become  orphans,  fatherless  \_without  a  father, 
Calvin,  Blayney,  Boothroyd,  Noyes,  Gerlach] 
— and  our  mothers  are  as  -widow^s.  That 
the  first  words  cannot  be  understood  exclusively 
of  the  loss  of  their  own  fathers,  is  evident  from 
the  expression  as  widows.  Pareau  is  of  the  opi- 
nion that  ividoivs  and  orjoAaws  indicate,  in  a  gene- 
ral way  only,  as  a  proverbial  formula,  tritissimam 
sortem  [a  very  sad  lot],  and  appeals  to  Is.  i.  17 ; 
Ps.  xciv.  6  ;  James  i.  27.  But  in  all  those  places, 
widows  and  orphans  in  the  strict  sense  of  the 
terms,  are  to  be  understood.  Thenius  under- 
stands by  the  mothers,  the  wives  of  the  King, 
who  were  with  the  little  company  among  whom 
our  song  originated.  But  even  if  we  allow,  that 
as  some  of  the  Princesses  of  the  royal  family, 
according  to  Jer.  xli.  10,  escaped  transportation, 
so  also  may  some  of  the  wives  of  the  royal 
harem,  yet  we  cannot  suppose  that  the  Poet  in- 
dicated these  as  the  mothers  of  himself  and  his 
companions,  because  they  were  not,  in  fact,  their 
mothers,  nor  was  it  customary  to  call  them  so. 
Ewald  refers  orphans  and  fatherless  to  the  loss  of 
the  sovereign  (the  father  of  his  country,  ii.  9; 
iv.  20)  and  of  the  theocracy,  but  widoirs  to  tli» 
communities  and  cities  (i.  1).  This  is  witliout 
doubt  correct,  as  far  as  this,  that  all  the  Isiael- 
ites  had,  in  this  respect,  become  fatherless  and 
their  mothers  widows.  But  why  might  not  the 
Poet,  at  the  same  time,  have  alluded  to  the  fact, 
that  in  the  prevailing  confusion  most  of  the 
mothers  could  not  certainly  know  whether  their 
husbands  were  dead  or  alive,  and  therefore  it 
could  be  correctly  said  of  them  that  they  were 
"as  widows"  (seei.  1)?  I  believe,  therefore, 
that  ver.  3  einV)races  every  species  of  orphan- 
age that  might  liave  existed  at  tliat  time.  [There 
were  so   many  orphans   and   mothers   separated 


CHAP.  V.  2-10. 


181 


from  their  husbands  among  the  people,  that  a 
Poet  might  well  exclaim.  Behold  in  us  a  people 
composed  of  fatherless  orphans,  whose  mothers 
are  as  widows!  But  the  particle  of  comparison 
attached  to  the  last  word,  as  widows,  suggests 
the  probability  that  the  whole  verse  is  intended 
metaphorically.  AVe  are  like  fatherless  orphans 
and  our  mothers  like  widows.  This  is  Gerlach's 
explanation. — W.  H.  H.] 

[Vers.  4-10  relate  to  the  general  distress  occa- 
fiioned  by  the  want  of  the  necessaries  of  life  and 
the  oppression  of  their  masters. — W.  H.  II.] 

Ver.  4.  "We  have  drunken  our  w^ater  for 
money;  our  -wood  is  sold  unto  us  (marg. 
coincih  for  price  unto  us).  Our  wafer  we  drink  for 
money ;  our  wood  comes  to  us  for  payment.  That 
the  want  of  water  before  the  capture  of  the  city 
is  not  here  intended,  is  evident  from  the  expres- 
sions our  water,  our  wood ;  for  the  prominence 
of  this  idea  can  only  signify  that  the  .Jews  were 
obliged  to  buy  from  their  enemies  the  wood  and 
water  that  were  rightly  their  own;  but  this  could 
have  been  the  case  only  after  the  capture  of  the 
city.  We  perceive  from  the  description,  that  the 
companies  of  the  captives,  in  all  cases  narrowly 
watched,  were  not  at  liberty  to  go,  at  their  own 
pleasure,  to  bring  wood  and  water.  But  they 
were  furnished,  either  with  no  provisions  at  all, 
or  in  insufiScient  quantities,  so  thai  in  order  to 
secure  the  necessaries  of  life,  they  were  obliged 
to  apply  to  their  guards,  who  made  them  pay 
dearly  f<jr  the  services  rendered  them.  It  appears 
further  from  this  passage,  that  the  Poet  has  here 
in  his  eye  that  period  of  the  captivity  when  the 
captives  were  still  in  their  own  land,  else  he 
could  not  say  "oi/r  water,  our  wood."  There 
seems  to  be  a  rhetorical  reason  for  the  use  of  the 
perfect  (ipni^)  in  the  first  clause,  and  of  the 
imperfect  (^XJ")  in  the  second.  For,  grammati- 
cally considered,  either  the  perfect  or  imperfect 
should  be  used  both  times,  since  the  two  acts  are 
entirely  homogeneous.  But  the  Poet  wished  to 
bring  variety  into  his  period,  perhaps  also  to 
avoid  the  clashing  together  of  two  tone-syllables, 
which  would  have  liappeiied,  if  it  had  been 
written  1N3.  He  could  introduce  this  variety, 
since  the  limit  between  these  two  verbal  forms  is 
a  fluctuating  one,  determined  by  the  subjective 
conception  of  the  speaker.  For,  in  many  cases, 
the  same  action  can  be  regarded  as  already  com- 
pleted and  as  still  in  progress.     See  for  example 

^Xi3r>  yxo  (Jos.  ix.  8)  and  DnX3  yXO  (Gen.  xlii. 
7),  iny  Gr.  §g  84,  87.  So  here  the  drinking  of 
water  for  money  is  represented  by  lypK'  as  some- 
thing accomplished,  being  constituted  by  many 
acts  of  drinking,  but  by  ^n5'  the  fetching  of  the 
wood  is  represented  as  something  not  yet  finished, 
something  still  continuing.  We  are  at  liberty  to 
translate  both  tenses,  so  far  as  they  are  con- 
cerned, by  the  present  or  by  the  preterit.  The 
context  shows  which  the  Poet  intends.  He  evi- 
dently is  describing  the  journej'  of  the  captives 
going  into  exile.  But  nothing  indicates  that  he 
looks  back  upon  it  as  already  accomplished,  that 
he  would  represent  it  as  already  terminated  in 
the  land  of  exile.  Consequently,  we  are  obliged 
to  translate  all  the  tenses,  which   refer  to  differ- 


ent incidents  of  the  journey,  in  the  present. 
[There  is  a  studied  effort  in  this  Song,  as  shown 
in  the  preliminary  note  to  this  chapter,  to  multiply 
words  ending  in  1,  ^J,  and  we  may  add  in  M-^ 
In  the  expressions  "■Our  water,"  '■^  our  wood," 
the  pronoun  is  added  merely,  if  we  may  so  say, 
for  the  sake  of  the  rhyme,  or,  more  correctly, 
the  assonance,  just  as  in  ver.  9  ho  says,  "  our 
bread."  The  writer  could  legitimately  gratify 
the  ear  by  this  expedient,  for  what  they  bought 
and  used  certainly  became  their  own.  It  is  ob- 
vious, therefore,  that  the  meaning  of  the  verse 
can  not  turn  on  the  use  of  the  word  our.  If  this 
liad  been  intended  to  be  emphatic,  and  to  repre- 
sent the  water  and  the  wood  as  their  property 
before  they  bought  it,  then  this  verse  should 
have  immediately  followed  ver.  2,  where  the 
transfer  of  their  property  to  new  owners  is  re- 
presented. Otherwise,  the  third  verse  intrudes 
a  new  idea  between  two  thoughts  that  are  closely 
related,  the  loss  of  their  inheritance  and  houses, 
and  the  necessity  of  purchasing  what  had  been 
tlioir  own  property.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
take  our  text  as  a  simple  statement  of  the  fact 
that  they  were  obliged  to  purchase  such  com- 
mon necessaries  of  life  as  water  and  wood,  we 
are  enabled  to  translate  the  preterit  verb  in  the 
past  indefinite  time.  The  Prophet  is  by  no  means 
describing  the  incidents  of  the  journey  of  the 
exiles  from  their  own  land.  He  is  enumerating 
and  heaping  together  en  masse  the  various  features 
of  sorrow  and  suffering  experienced  by  the  un- 
happy people,  without  particular  reference  either 
to  the  time  or  place  of  their  happening.  Among 
other  things  that  had  happened  was  their  having 
to  pay  money  for  the  watei  they  drank:  and  he 
uses  the  preterit  tense,  We  have  drunken  our  zvater 
for  money, — this  is  among  the  things  that  had 
happened,  perhaps  once  only,  perhaps  oftener ; 
but  there  was  another  hardsliip  of  more  frequent 
occurrence,  one  often  repeated,  and  that  may 
have  continued  down  to  the  time  when  he  wrote, 
and  this  he  expresses,  as  the  Hebrew  so  con- 
stantly expresses  the  recurrence  of  events  even 
after  they  are  past,  by  the  future  form  of  the 
verb,  which  we  may  render  as  an  historical  im- 
perfect— our  wood  came  to  us,  or  was  coming,  that 
is,  it  came  in  that  way  only,  for  a  price,  or  we 
may  render  it  as  a  present — j7  comes  still  onlyybr 
pay.—Vf.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  5.  Our  necks  are  under  persecution 
(marg.  On  otir  7iecks  are  we  persecuted);  we  labor 
and  have  no  rest.  We  are  driven  headlong 
[Ueber  Hals  und  Kopf  werden  wir  gejagt,  lit. 
over  neck  and  head  [over  head  and  ears,  as  we  say 
in  English)  are  we  driven'\  ;  are  we  tired,  rest  is  not 

permittedus.  The  Septuagint  connects  'J"|^i<i^  7^. 
upon  our  necks,  with  what  precedes,  fiAa  tjfiuv  iv 
(iXXdypaTt  yX-dev  etvc  tov  Tpaxrj^.ov  ijiiuv,  our  wood 
in  exchange  for  our  money  came  upon  our  neck.  So 
also  the  Arabic  version.     The  Syriac  closes  ver. 

4  with  "I'TIDS.  and  refers  ^S^b'  to  what  follows, 

...  ^  7 

SO  that  it  also  translates  venerunt  super  collum 
nostrum,  they  came  upon  our  neck,  where  either 
ligna,  wood,  or  hostes,  the  enemy,  may  be  regarded 
as  the  subject.  Among  the  moderns,  Aben-Ezr.a. 
and  J.  D.w.  Mich.velis  also  connect  the  phras» 
upon  our  necks  with  what  precedes.      The  latter 


182 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


gives  the  sense  thus,  ligna  nostra  pretio  empta  cer- 
vicibus  noslris  imposita  in  urbem  importantur,  our 
wood  bought  with  a  price  and  laid  upon  our 
necks  is  carried  into  the  city.  The  explanation 
of  the  Sjriac  produces  a  very  harsh  zeugma  in 
ver.  4,  renders  the  following  sentence  unintelli- 
gible, and  expresses  a  thought  that  may  be  termed 
at  least  unnecessary.  The  objections  to  the 
other  versions  are  as  follows.  1.  Tn03,/o;' />«?/, 
ver.  4  must  be  taken,  either  as  dependent  on  a 
verb  to  be  supplied  [emta),  or  as  belonging  to 
1X3',  in  the  vei*y  unsuitable  sense,  that  the  Jews 
were  paid  for  carrying  the  wood.  2.  The  sym- 
metrical proportions  of  the  verses  are  destroyed; 
ver.  4  is  too  long,  ver.  5  too  short.  We  will  then 
follow  the  Masoretic  division  of  the  verses.  But 
as  thus  arranged,  this  verse  has  undergone 
various  interpretations.  Pareau  translates  super 
cervicibus  nostris  insessores  patimnr,  we  bear  sitters 
[riders'\  upon  our  necks.  But  ?J3'[T"1J  cannot  mean 
we  are  ridden,  or  we  carry  riders.  As  little  can  it  mean 
naturally,  we  bear  persecutor^  or  oppressors,  which 
would  correspond  with  Pareau's  idea,  only  with- 
out a  figure.  Others  (Raschi,  De  Wette,  Ewald, 
1st  ed.,  Meyer,  Vaihinger,  Enqelhardt)  trans- 
late on  our  necks  the  yoke,  or  the  yoke  on  the  neck 
are  we  persecuted.  But  as  Thenius  has  remarked, 
the  yoke  here  is  a  superadiled  idea  entirely  ar- 
bitrary. [Blaynet  reads  7J?,  yoke,  instead  of 
the  preposition  '7^,  upon.  But  we  must  then,  as 
he  does,  take  the  verb  in  a  sense  it  cannot  have 
of  being  burtliened  with.  With  the  yoke  of  our  necks 
are  we  contimmlly  burthejied ;  or,  as  Boothroyd 
does,  supply  the  preposition  on  ami  the  verb  is, 
and  make  an  independent  proposition  of  the  first 
two  words.  The  yoke  is  on  our  necks,  we  are  pur- 
sued; or,  as  Noyes  does,  supply  two  preposi- 
tions.  With  the  yoke  upon  our  necks,  we  are  driven. 

Henderson,  without  changing  7i?  into  i'^,  thinks 
that  upon  our  necks  ice  are  persecuted  expresses 
"  elliptically  the  great  hardship  to  which  the 
Jews  were  reduced  in  being  compelled  as  cap- 
tives to  bear  a  heavy  yoke  on  their  necks;"  and 
translates.  We  are  persecuted  with  a  yoke  on  our 
necks.  So  William  Lowth  seems  to  understand 
the  text  and  refers  to  Deut.  xxviii.  48.  "  We 
are  driven  to  our  work  like  the  bullock  that  has 
a  yoke  about  his  neck"  (Adam  Clarke). — W. 
H.  H.]  AH  these  explanations  fail  in  this  that 
they  let  7j^  depend,  not  immediately  on  ^JS'H'^J, 
but  very  unnecessarily  on  an  entirely  different 
idea  supposed  to  be  concealed  therein.  Thenius 
and  Ewald  (2d  ed.)  have  perceived  the  right 
sense,  when  they  translate,  on  the  neck  were  we 
pursued  (so  Ewald:  Thenius  expresses  the 
same  sense  by  the  words,  they  pursued  us  over 
our  necks,  i.  e.  since  they  are  ever  close  behind 
us).  I  translate.  We  are  driven  on  over  our  necks, 
that  is  to  say,  so  that  the  driving  goes  over  our 
necks  onwards — and  this  idea  corresponds  ex- 
actly with  our  German  phrase,  "  iiber  Hals  uiid 
Kopf "  [lit.  over  neck  and  head,  i.  e.  headlong]. 
Luther:  "iiber  Hals."  [In  full:  Man  treibt 
ans  iiber  Hals."!     Besides,   HTl   cannot  be  taken 

i-    T 

in  tF>e  sense  of  pursuing,  for  not  fugitives,  but 
captives  are  here  spoken  of,  who  are  already  in 


the  hands  of  the  enemies  and  are  driven  onward 
without  mercy.  This  appears  plainly  from  vex-s. 
5,  8.  The  meaning  to  drive,  to  chase,  undoubt- 
edly lies  in  the  root  Hll  (see  the  kindred  roots 
n^"^'  ^^^'  ^?^)>  ^^^  is  as  plain  as  daylight  in 

such  places  as  Lev.  xxvi.  36  (the  sound  of  a 
falling  leaf  shall  chase  them).  Job  xxx.  15;  Is. 
xvii.  13.  [It  would  be  a  relief  to  accepl  Dr. 
Naegelsbach's  simple  explanation,  and  trans- 
late. They  drove  us,  or  we  were  driven  headlong, 
or  as  we  would  say  in  our  colloquial  English, 
heels  over  head,  but  there  is  no  evidence  that  the 
Hebrew  words  are  used  in  an}'  such  colloquial 
sense.  The  next  best  thing  is  to  adopt  the  trans- 
lation of  Maurer,  Thenius,  Ewald,  Owen  and 
(jrERLACH,  which  Dr.  Naecelsbach  also  approves 
of.  On  our  necks  were  ive  pursued,  i.  e.  our  pur- 
suers followed  U3  so  closely  as  to  be,  as  it  were, 
on  our  necks.  -'We  are  hunted  by  pursuers 
who  are  ever  hanging  over  our  neck"  (Words- 
worth). The  objection  to  taking  the  verb  in  the 
sense  of  pursuing,  on  the  ground  that  the  people 
are  here  considered  as  captives  and  nol  fugitives, 
grows  out  of  the  incorrect  interpretation  of  ver. 
4,  and  involves  an  entire  misconception  of  the 
intention  of  this  Song.  It  is  not  the  design  of 
the  Prophet  to  give  a  detailed  account  of  suc- 
cessive and  related  events,  but  to  heap  up  to- 
gether, in  one  rapid  and  vehement  recapitula- 
tion, all  the  wrongs,  indignities  and  sufferings 
the  people  had  endured,  without  reference  to 
times  or  places. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  6.  Whilst  the  Poet  describes  the  onward 
march  of  the  larger  part  of  the  people  to  the  land 
of  banishment,  he  is  reminded  that  the  people 
are,  by  this  means,  still  more  widely  separated 
and  torn  asunder;  for  one  part,  by  far  the  smaller 
part,  has  been  compelled  to  turn  southwards  to- 
wards Egypt.  [This  verse  confirms  the  opinion 
that  the  Prophet  is  not  relating  successive  events 
iu  the  order  of  their  occurrence  and  in  their  re- 
lations to  each  other;  but  is  stating  independent 
facts  and  instances,  all  of  which  contribute  to 
present  to  God  an  appeal  for  pity  and  mercy. 
There  is  no  close  connection,  therefore,  between 
vers.  5,  6,  such  as  Owen  and  Gerlach  would 
find,  when  they  say  that  ver.  6  relates  wliat  they 
did  when  so  closely  pursued.  According  to  Dr. 
Naegelsbach's  interpretation,  that  ver.  5  refers 
to  the  Jews  on  their  way  to  Babylonia,  driven 
before  their  captors,  the  connection  of  ver.  6  is 
impossible.  While  they  were  so  closely  pur- 
sued that  their  pursuers  were  on  their  necks,  did 
even  a  small  part  of  them  miraculously  escape 
and  flee  to  Egypt?  Dr.  Naegelsbach  does  not 
mean  to  assert  tliis;  but  his  theory  of  interpre- 
tation would  seem  to  demand  it. — W.  H.  H.]^ 
"We  have  given  the  hand  to  the  Egyp- 
tians, and  to  the  Assyrians  to  be  satisfied 
■with  bread,  —  Towards  Egypt  stretched  we  the 
hand,  —  Towards  Assyria, — in  order  to  be  satisfied 
with  bread.  To  stretch  out  the  hand  can  mean 
here  only,  to  stretch  out  the  hand  as  a  suppliant; 
see  Jer.  1.  15;  1  Chron.  xxix.  24.  [Calvin: 
"To  give  the  hand,  is  explained  in  three  ways: 
some  say  that  it  means  humbly  to  ask;  others, 
to  make  an  agreement ;  and  otliers,  to  extend  it 
in  token  of  misery,  as  he  who  cannot  ask  for 
help,  intimates  his  wants  by  extending  his  hand. 


CHAP.  V.  2-10. 


l»;J 


But  the  Prophet  seems  simply  to  mean  that  the 
people  were  so  distressed  by  want,  that  they 
begged  bread."]  But  in  what  sense  did  the  .Jews 
stretch  out  the  hand  to  Assyria?  They  had  sub- 
mitted to  this  great  power,  not  willingly,  as  they 
had  thrown  themselves  into  the  arms  of  the 
Egyptians,  but  by  compulsion.  Yet  they  must, 
if  they  would  live,  stretch  out  their  suppliant 
hand,  to  receive  a  morsel  of  bread  from  the  hand 
of  Assyria  bestowing  it  upon  them.  But  what 
power  is  intended  by  Assyria?  It  has  been  un- 
derstood of  Assyria  strictly  speaking,  which  car- 
ried the  ten  tribes  into  exile.  But  it  would  be 
strange,  indeed,  if  the  Poet  here  overlooked  the 
Babylonish  exile.  That  he  says  Assur,  and  not 
Babel,  may  be  explained  on  the  ground  that  he 
has  in  mind  the  Assyrian,  as  well  as  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity.  While  Babel  never  stands  for 
Assur  and  Babel,  the  name  Assur  is  so  used  as 
to  embrace  both  countries;  see  2  Kings  xvii.  24; 
xviii.  11:  xxiii.  29;  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  11.  The 
brief  words  of  our  text  exhibit  also  the  fact,  that 
Israel  no  longer  existed  as  a  nation,  but  was  en- 
tirely given  over  to  the  power  of  the  kingdoms 
of  this  world,  oa  whose  favor  its  very  life  de- 
pended ;  and,  while  the  smaller  part  found  itself 
in  the  power  of  Egypt,  the  larger  part,  which 
included  both  Israel,  carried  away  into  Assyrian 
exile,  and  Judah,  deported  to  Babylon,  is  sub- 
ject to  Assur, — to  Assur  in  the  widest  sense  of 
the  term,  understanding  thereby,  not  only  Assy- 
ria in  the  strict  sense,  but  Babylon  also.  See 
also  Jer.  ii.  18.  [Noyes  is  of  the  opinion  that 
giving  the  hand,  imports  submission,  as  in  Jer.  1. 
15;  to  stretch  out  the  hand  to  be  bound,  as  it 
were.  Thus,  he  remarks,  "  in  2  Chron.  xxx.  8, 
what  is  translated  in  the  common  version  yield 
yourselves  unto  the  Lord,  is  in  the  original  give  the 
hand  to  the  Lord."  The  context  here,  never- 
theless, favors  the  idea  that  the  Jews  were  re- 
duced in  many  instances  to  abject  beggary,  and 
entire  dependence  for  the  necessaries  of  life  on 
these  heathen  nations,  the  greatest  enemies  their 
country  had.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  7.  Our  fathers  have  sinned  and  are 
not:  and  vye  have  borne  their  iniquities. 
— Our  fathers  have  .tinned:  they  are  not;  we  bear 
their  sins.  [There  is  no  sufficient  reason  for 
rendering  the  last  verb  as  a  present.  The  Eng- 
lish version  is  more  literal. — W.  H.  H.]  Com- 
paring this  verse  with  ver.  16,  a  certain  parallel- 
ism is  observable.  In  both  the  sins  of  the  people 
are  asserted  to  be  the  cause  of  the  calamities 
previously  described.  But  ver.  7  says,  Our  fa- 
thers have  sinned  and  we  bear  their  guilt.  Ver. 
16,  on  the  contrary  says,  Woe  to  us,  we  have 
sinned.  Here,  as  in  i.  5,  8,  9,  14,  18;  ii.  14;  iii. 
42;  iv.  6,  12-14,  the  description  of  calamities 
endured  constitute  a  principal  feature  in  the  con- 
fession of  sin.  As  one  paragraph  ends  with  ver. 
7,  and  another  with  ver.  16,  ver.  8  begins  a  new 
paragraph.  [  This  division  separates  verses 
closely  allied.  The  subject  down  to  ver.  10  is 
chiefly  related  to  sufferings  connected  with  the 
want  of  the  necessaries  of  life.  With  ver.  11 
begins  a  description  of  individual  instances  of 
outrage  and  cruelty  (vers.  11-14),  followed  by  a 
description  of  the  effects  of  all  these  calamities, 
public  and  private,  on  the  theocratic  people  who 
offer  the  prayer.     Ver.  IG  is  as  intimately  con- 


nected with  what  follows,  as  with  what  precedes 
it. — W.  H.  H.]  There  is  at  least  some  truth  in 
the  assertion  made  in  ver.  7.  For  the  great  ca- 
tastrophe had  been  brought  about,  not  only  by 
the  guilt  of  the  last  generation,  but  also  by  that 
of  previous  generations  (Jer.  iii.  25;  xv.  4;  xvi, 
11,  12).  But  ver.  7,  without  ver.  16,  would  con- 
tain only  a  partial  view  of  the  truth.  The  two 
verses  complete  each  other.  [Wordsworth  : 
"  The  sins  of  their  forefathers  were  visited  upon 
them,  because  they  themselves  had  sinned,  as 
they  themselves  confess.  .  .  .  There  is,  there- 
fore, no  reason  for  supposing,  with  some,  that 
these  words  could  not  have  been  written  by  Jere- 
miah, being  at  variance  with  the  doctrine  ia 
Jer.  xxxi.  29."] — And  are  not  (QJ''.|?*,  without 
],  see  Gk.  notes  above;  they  are  not.)  These 
words  connect  themselves  rather  with  what  fol- 
lows, than  with  what  precedes.  Our  fathers  have 
sinned.    Whilst  tliey  are  no  more,  loe  bear  their  sins. 

Ver.  8.  Servants  have  ruled  over  us : 
there  is  none  that  doth  deliver  us  out  of 
their  hands. — \_None  delivered  from,  their  hands. '\ 
Who  are  these  servants?  Satraps  are  suggested. 
So  say  those  who  understand  ver.  5  of  the  resi- 
dence of  a  part  of  the  people  in  Palestine  or 
elsewhere.  But  we  see  from  ver.  5,  that  the 
subject  of  discourse  is  the  march  of  the  actually 
exiled  hosts.  Satraps,  itis  true,  are  the  king's  ser- 
vants, but  they  are  not  merely  servants,  they  are 
not  slaves.  That  men  of  distinguished  descent  and 
high  rank  should  stand  under  Satraps  was  a  re- 
proach, when  considered  in  a  theocratic  point  of 
view,  but  not  to  be  regarded  as  a  matter  of  suf- 
ficient importance  to  be  mentioned  in  this  place. 
Besides,  in  fact  Gedaliah  ruled  in  Judea,  himself 
a  Jew  and,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Jere- 
miah (xl.  7-12),  a  well-disposed  man.  But  that 
real  slaves  were  employed  for  overseers  and 
drivers  of  the  marching  captives,  this  was  cer- 
tainly in  the  highest  degree  hard  and  likewise 
disgraceful.  [This  again  is  to  be  regarded  as 
one  feature  of  the  great  variety  of  sufferings 
that  befell  the  people.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
suppose  that  the  whole  people  were  at  any  time 
under  the  lordship  of  slaves  or  under-servants. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  an  exclusive  re- 
ference to  the  bands  of  captives  that  were  driven 
to  Babylonia.  It  is  enough  that  in  their  degraded 
state  it  often  happened  that  they  had  to  submit 
to  domineering  and  harsh  treatment  from  men 
that  were  themselves  menials. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  9.  We  gat  our  bread  vrith — at — the 
peril  of  our  lives,  because  of  the  sword 
of  the  wilderness.  Rosenmueller  refers 
this  verse  to  the  dangers  which  the  corn-trans- 
ports out  of  Egypt  may  have  had  to  encounter  in 
the  wilderness.  But  is  it  supposable  that  corn 
was  brought  from  Egypt,  when  the  larger  part 
of  the  people  had  been  led  away  to  Babylon, 
and  the  smaller  part  had  themselves  fled  to 
Egypt?  EwALi),  on  the  other  hand,  finds  in 
these  words  "  a  remarkable  indication,  that  most 
of  the  fugitives  in  Egypt  dwelt  at  the  nortli- 
eastern  border  close  to  the  desert,"  and  so  were 
compelled  "to  wring  their  bread  from  the  desert 
and  its  robbers."  But  when  in  the  world  was 
bread  brought  from  the  desert,  even  by  tiiuse 
dwelling  on  the  borders  of  Egypt,  and  not  from 


184 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


the  interior  of  the  country  ?  Thenius  presumes 
that  this  Song  was  written  amid  the  circum- 
stances of  one  of  those  small  companies  that 
remained  in  Palestine  and  were  scattered  about 
in  that  land.  These,  falling  in  on  their  pas- 
ture-grounds with  the  warlike  tribes  sojourn- 
ing among  them,  would  be  compelled  to  get  their 
Bubsistence  by  fighting  for  it.  But  that  suppo- 
sition is  confirmed  neither  by  the  history  (ob- 
serve Jer.  xlii.  1,  "all  the  people,"  etc.),  nor  by 
the  contents  of  our  Song  (coiupare  ver.  8  espe- 
cially, with  the  opinion  of  Thenius,  that  the 
little  company,  among  whom  the  Song  was  writ- 
ten, preferred  liberty  in  poverty,  to  dependence 
in  prosperity,  ver.  6).  The  view  of  Vaihinger 
rests  on  the  same  opinion,  and  differs  from  that 
of  Thenius  only  in  this,  that  he  understands  the 
bringing  of  bread  to  refer  to  merchant  travellers 
who  were  in  peril  from  Bedouin  robbers.  I  am 
of  the  opinion,  that  the  expedition  here  indicated, 
was  an  incident  belonging  to  the  experience  of 
those  Israelites  who  had  not  been  led  away  to 
Babylon,  and  especially  of  those  who  had  fled  to 
Egypt.  It  is  allowable  to  suppose,  both  from 
general  reasons  and  particularly  from  ver.  6, 
that  this  one  of  the  two  parts  of  the  people  is 
intended.  Much  is  touched  upon  in  the  Song, 
that  happened  to  all  in  common  (vers.  2,  3,  7, 
10-12) ;  much  that  only  befell  those  who  suffered 
captivity  (vers.  4,  5,  8)  ;  here  (ver.  9)  we  have 
a  description  that  suits  only  the  condition  of 
those  fugitives  to  Egypt,  who  yet  retained  their 
freedom.  But  I  refer  the  verse,  not  as  Ewald 
to  those  already  settled  in  Egypt,  but  to  events 
and  circumstances  preceding  their  settlement. 
According  to  Jeremiah  xli.  8,  ten  men  bought 
their  lives  of  Ishmael,  the  murderer  of  Gedaliah, 
at  tlie  price  of  provisions  which  they  had  hidden. 
From  this  we  see  that  provisions  were  scarce  and 


that  there  were  bands  of  robbers  who  hunted  for 
them.  Is  it  not  then  in  the  highest  degree  pro- 
bable, that  the  crowd  which  fled  to  Egypt  (Jer. 
xli.  16-18),  both  while  they  wene  still  in  Pales 
tine,  and  frequently  when  they  were  in  the  de- 
sert, could  obtain  what  was  necessary  for  sub- 
sistence only  at  the  peril  of  their  lives  ? — [We 
gat  our  bread.  Here  again  we  have  a  future 
tense,  NOJ  ;  intimating  the  frequent  recurrence, 
and  doubtless  the  continuance,  at  the  time  of 
writing,  of  this  peril.  —  VV.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  10.  Our  skin  ■was  black  like  an 
oven.  [So  Broughton,  Calvin  and  Hender- 
son. See  Ps.  Ixviii.  13.]  Our  skin  is  burnt  [Aas 
been  burnt'\  like  an  oven.  [This  sense  is  the  one 
generally  adopted,  on  the  ground  that  it  is  more 
consistent  with  the  effects  of  famine,  and  more 
congenial  with  the  derivation  and  use  of  the 
Hebrew  word.  Blatney  and  Notes  translate 
the  verb  parched.— W.  H.  H.].  The  effect  of 
hunger  on  the  skin  is  compared  to  that  of  heat 
on  the  walls  of  the  oven.  Like  these,  that  has 
become  hot,  dry,  hard,  cracked.  There  was 
hunger  enough  with  the  two  parts  of  the  people, 
who  stretched  out  their  hands,  one  to  As-yria, 
the  other  to  Egypt,  until  the  one  had  arrived  in 
Assyria  and  the  other  in  Egypt.  —  Because  of 
the  terrible  (marg.  terrors,  or  .'storms  of) 
famine, — because  of  the  heat  (or  hotness.  Gluten) 
of  hunger.  [Because  of  the  6Mrn«>!^  (Broughton) 
or  burnings  (Calvin,  Notes).  Gerlach  trans- 
lates the  word  raging,  or  fury  (Wiithen),  and  so 
it  is  rendered  by  Alexander  (in  Ps.  xi.  6 ;  cxix. 
53,  the  only  other  places  where  the  word  occurs), 
who  remarks,  that  "no  English  word  is  strong 
enough  to  represent  the  Hebrew  except  rage  or 
fury."  Blatnet  translates  stormy  blasts  of  hun- 
ger, and  Henderson  the  hot  blasts  of  famine. — 
W.  H.  H.] 


V.  11-13. 

11       They  ravished   the  women   in  Zion,  and  the   maids  in   the   cities   of  Judah. 
12, 13  Princes  are  hanged  by  their  hand  :  the  faces  of  elders  were  not  honoured.    They 
took  the  young  men  to  grind,  and  the  children  fell  under  the  wood. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.ll.— njy,  see  iii.  33.— miiT  ^^V,  see  Jer.  i.  15  ;  iv.  16  ;  ix.  10  ;  and  elsewhere  very  frequently. 
T  •  T       ;      ••  T 

Ver.  12.— n^p  is  found  nowhere  in  Jeremiah.— 1171  Jeremiah  never  uses  ;  see  Lev.  xix.  15,  32 ;  Ex.  xxiii.  3. 

T   T  "  T 

ynT.\Z.—nT^'0,handm,ill,\s  aw.  Aey.     See  elsewhere  njnCD   Prov.  xii.  4,  and  the  verb  Deut.  xi.  8;  Jud.  xvi.  21 ;  Is. 
«lvii.  2,  etc.    Jeremiah  uses  neither  the  verb  nor  the  subetftntive.- 7ty3  with  3,  Jer.  vi.  21 ;  Is.  viii.  15 ;  Lev.  xxvi.  37. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

[Vers.  11-13.  The  sufferings  of  individuals,  of 
all  ages  and  conditions,  especially  their  degra- 
dation, are  described.  These  verses  still  further 
confirm  the  opinion,  that  this  Song  belongs  to  no 
special  time  or  locality,  but  that  it  is  a  general 
enumeration  of  the  various  evils  the  people  had 
suffered,  from  the  time  when  Jerusalem  was  in- 
vaded, to  the  time  when  the  Prophet  indited  this 
Poem.— W.  H.  H.] 


Ver.  11.  In  this  and  the  following  verses  (to 
ver.  15)  are  described  the  sorrows  which  befell 
particular  classes  of  persons  at  the  capture  of 
the  city.  These  are  incidents  whicii  partly  be- 
long to  an  earlier  period  of  the  history,  and 
partly  still  continue  in  force.  The  violation  of 
the  women  and  the  hanging  up  of  the  Princes 
are  past  events,  but  the  pain  they  caused 
still  survives. — They  ravished — dishonored. 
[Owen:  '-There  is  liere  a  delicate  word  for  a 
disgraceful  act.  The  words  literally  are, —  Wo- 
men in  Zion  they  humbled  (or,  were  humbled).      It 


CHAP.  V.  11-13. 


180 


is  humbled  by  the  Sept.  and  Vulg."  They  suffered 
not  only  the  worst,  but  all  sorts  of  indignities. 
— W.  H.  H.]. — The  women  in  Zion  and 
the  maids — virgins — in  the  cities  of  Judah. 
[Blayney,  BoothroyDj  Henderson  and  Noyes 
translate  the  first  word  matrons.  The  Hebrew 
word  is  as  generic  as  our  word  women.  Besides, 
this  transfers  the  antithesis  from  Zion  and  the 
cities  of  Judah,  where  it  belongs,  to  the  distinc- 
tion between  matrons  and  maids,  which  the  par- 
allelism does  not  require.  The  women  generally 
were  humbled,  even  in  Zion,  yea  and  throughout 
all  the  cities  of  Judah.  Calvin:  "  He  mentioned 
Sion  rather  than  Jerusalem, — it  was  indeed  to 
state  a  part  for  the  whole ;  but  that  place  we 
know  had  been  chosen  by  God  that  His  name 
might  be  there  worshipped.  .  .  .  As,  then,  God 
had  there  His  palace,  that  He  might  dwell  in  the 
midst  of  His  people,  it  was  a  disgraceful  sight 
in  the  extreme  to  see  women  ravished  there,  for 
the  temple  of  God  was  thus  violated." — W.  H.  H] 
Ver.  12.  Princes  are — ivere  [have  been'] — 
hanged  up — hung — by  their  hand  \i.  e.  sus- 
pended by  the  hand. — W.  H.  H.].  This  has  been 
explained  in  three  ways.  1.  The  Princes  hung 
themselves  with  their  own  hand.  But  since,  ac- 
cording to  Deut.  xxi.  23,  he  that  is  hanged  is  ac- 
cursed of  God,  this  is  incredible.  Why  could 
they  not  have  killed  themselves  in  some  other 
way  ?  Calvin  indeed  surmises,  that  they  were 
compelled  to  hang  themselves.  But  would  not 
this  have  been  explicitly  staled,  if  the  Jews  had 
been  compelled  to  do  it  ?  2.  At  their  side  [i.  e. 
Princes  were  hung  beside  or  near  the  cities  (so 
Ewald),  or  at  the  side,  or  in  near  proximity  to 
the  humbled  women].  But  against  this  are  (1) 
the  masculine  sufi&x,  (2)  and  yet  more  the  pre- 
position 3, — it  should  be  DT"/  (1  Sam.  lix.  3  ; 
Prov.  viii.  3;  1  Chron.  xviii.  17;  xxiii.  28). 
Only  two  places  can  be  named,  where  n\3  may 

stand  for  ^_7,  namely,  1  Sam.  xxi.  14 ;  Job  xv. 
23.  But  in  the  first  passage  it  is,  DT3  Syhn^l, 
he  raved  in  or  under  their  hands;  and  in  Job  xv. 
23,  the  sense,  as  the  connection  shows,  is — he 
knows  that  he  himself  (by  his  own  hand)  has 
prepared  the  day  of  darkness.  Nothing  else 
remains  for  us,  therefore,  but  to  translate,  3.  by 
their  hand,  and  to  refer  the  sufiix  to  their 
enemies.  The  sense,  indeed,  is  somewhat  feeble ; 
but  verbal  and  substantial  arguments  render  this 
explanation  necessary.  [Gerlach  adopts  the 
same  view.  Besides  the  evident  awkwardness 
of  this  construction,  it  is  open  to  the  very  seri- 
ous objection,  that  the  enemies  have  not  been 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  context,  nor  are  they 
prominently  in  the  mind  of  either  writer  or 
speaker.  The  preceding  verse  merely  tells  us 
that  women  in  Zion  and  virgins  in  the  cities  of 
Judah  had  been  humbled.  But  by  whom  ?  The 
natural  inference  is,  by  the  public  enemy.  Yet 
this  is  not  said  ;  is  not  even  inevitable,  and  if  it 
were,  the  mind  of  the  reader  is  occupied  with 
the  women  who  suffered,  not  with  the  men  who 
inflicted  the  injury.  The  pronoun,  if  it  refers 
to  any  subject  in  the  preceding  verse,  must,  it 
would  seem,  refer  to  the  women,  or  possibly  to 
the  cities.  But  that  it  does  not  refer  to  either 
»f  these  is  evident  from  its  gender,  and  from  the 


absence  of  any  intelligible  sense  in  which  it  can 
refer  to  them.  We  must  conclude  that  it  refers 
to  the  persons  immediately  named  in  close  and 
preceding  connection,  and  who  according  to  all 
fixed  rules  of  grammar,  must  be  its  subject.  If 
this  is  so,  then  it  can  only  mean  either,  what 
Calvin  says,  that  the  Princes  committed  suicide, 
and  that  by  hanging  themselves,  which  as  has 
been  said  is  utterly  incredible  ;  or  else,  what  the 
collocation  of  the  words  in  the  original  naturally 
suggests,  that  the  princes  were  hung  up,  i.  e.  sus- 
pended, by  the  hand,  or  their  hand.  The  pronoun 
may  properly  be  dispensed  with,  for  its  presence 
here  seems  entirely  due  to  the  preference  of  the 
writer  for  words  ending  in  D ;  it  belongs  to  the 
rhyme,  or  assonance,  and  is  not  intended  to  be 
emphatic.  So  the  Vulgate  translates,  omitting 
the  pronoun :  Principes  manu  suspensi  sunt. — 
Henderson  also  omits  the  pronoun :  but  he 
overlooks  the  Niphal  form  of  the  verb  and  makes 
the  enemy  its  subject.  He  translates.  Princes 
they  hung  up  by  the  hand.  Boothroyd,  more  cor- 
rectly, Princes  were  hung  up  by  the  hand.  He 
supposes  that  the  Princes  and  elders  were  first 
murdered  and  then  hung  up.  Owen:  "The 
most  obvious  meaning  of  the  words  is,  that 
Princes  were  hung  or  suspended  by  the  hand, 
and  not  by  the  neck.  Such  a  punishment .... 
may  have  been  a  barbarity  resorted  to  by  the 
Chaldeans.  This  seems  to  be  the  meaning  con- 
veyed by  the  Versions  and  the  Targum."  If 
they  were  not  tortured  to  death  in  this  way,  it  is 
not  unlikely  that  "the  sons  of  Zedekiah,"  and 
"all  the  Princes  of  Judah"  were  slain  in  Rib- 
lah  by  being  beheaded,  and  that  their  headless 
trunks  were  suspended  by  the  hands  on  the 
walls  of  the  city.  Thus  the  headless,  naked 
body  of  Saul,  and  the  bodies  of  his  three 
sons,  were  fastened  to  the  walls  of  Bethshan 
(1  Sam.  xxxi.  8-12).  "  It  was  a  custom  with  the 
Persians,  after  they  had  slain,  strangled,  or  be- 
headed their  enemy,  to  hang  their  bodies  upon 
poles  or  empale  them.  In  this  way  they  treated 
Hirstseus  of  Miletum,  and  Leonidas  of  Lacedae- 
mon.  See  Herodotus,  Lib.  vi.  c.  30;  Lib.  vii.  c. 
238"  (Adam  Clarke).  Or,  there  may  have  been 
instances  in  which  Princes  were  thus  suspended, 
not  after  death,  nor  for  the  purpose  of  killing 
them,  but  as  an  ignominious  and  torturing  punish- 
ment. It  is  said  that  "  no  punishment  is  more 
common  in  the  East.  Has  a  master  a  refractory 
slave,  .  .  .  several  men  are  called,  who  tie  the 
offender's  hands  and  hoist  him  to  the  roof  till  he 
beg  forgiveness"  (Comp.  Comm.). — W.  H.  H.] 
The  faces  of  Elders  were  not  regarded. 
This  is  said  in  allusion  to  Lev.  xix.  32,  "  Thou 
shalt  honor  the  face  of  the  old  man,"  comp.  Lev. 
xix.  15  ;  Ex.  xxiii.  3.  Although  in  the  places 
referred  to,  the  word  Elders  is  intended  as  a 
designation  of  age,  not  of  dignity,  yet  we  are 
obliged  to  take  it  in  the  latter  sense  here ;  be- 
cause it  is  placed  in  parallelism  with  Princes,  and 
because  the  aged  in  contrast  with  the  youthful  are 
spoken  of  in  ver.  14. 

Ver.  13.  They  took  the  young  men  to 
grind — the  young  men  are  obliged  to  carry  the  mill 
— [Noyes:  Young  men  carried  mill-stones].  The 
Vulgate  translates,  Adolescentibus  impudice  abusi 
sunt  (same  as,  Adolescentes  moUtionem  passi  sunt). 
[DouAY :   They  abused   the   young  men  indecently. 


186 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


which  is  explained  by  this  note,  "  i.  e.,  made 
them  grind  naked  in  the  mill."  But  the  second 
clause  of  the  verse  is  against  any  such  interpre- 
tation of  the  first  clause.  The  explanations,  Ju- 
venes  ad  molendum  sumscrunt,  Young  men  were 
taken  to  grind,  and  Juvenes  molas  agitarunt  or 
versarimt,  Young  men  shook  or  turned  mills,  are 
verbally  incorrect,  for  the  verb  HWl  does  not 
mean  agitare,  to  shake :  to  give  it  the  sense  of 
turning,  i  would  be  necessary.  But  the  simple 
literal  meaning  of  the  word  [to  lift,  Gerlach  : — 
to  carry'],  entirely  suffices.  For  not  only  was  the 
camjing  of  the  hand-mills  on  the  journey  a  heavy 
burden,  but  that  they  carried  these  implies  that 
they  were  also  compelled  to  turn  them,  t.  «.,  to 


grind  with  them.  As  thus  explained,  the  first 
clause  corresponds  with  the  second.  And  [The 
omission  of  the  conjunction  in  this  song,  where 
it  might  be  expected,  makes  its  expression  here 
more  emphatic.  Young  men  have  been  compelled 
to  carry  mill-stones,  even  hoys,  or  mere  children  have 
fallen  under  the  heavy  burdens  of  wood  they  were 
forced  to  carry. — W.  H.  H.]  the  children  fell 
under  the  wood. — Boys  fall  [properly, /cW,  or 
have  fallen. — W.  H.  H.]  under  the  wood.  The 
D'^inS,  the  most  blooming  and  strongest  of  the 
youth  were  obliged  to  carry  the  mill-stones  (see 
Herz.  R.-Enc.  x.  p.  82),  the  boys  generally  were 
required  to  drag  the  wood.  [The  most  laborious 
and  menial  services  were  required  of  the  Jewish 
youth  and  children. — W.  H.  H.] 


V.  14-18. 

14  The  elders  have  ceased  from  the  gate,  the  young  men  from  their  music.    The 

15  joy  of  our  heart  is  ceased  ;   our  dance  is  turned  into  mourning.      The  crown  is 

16  fallen  from  our  head  :  woe  unto  us,  that  we  have  sinned  !     For  this  our  heart  is 

17  faint ;  for  these  things  our  eyes  are  dim.     Because  of  the  mountain  of  Zion,  which 

18  is  desolate,  the  foxes  walk  upon  it. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  14.  r\2^  with  TO  following,  Jer.  vii.  34;  xvi.  9;  xxxi.  36;  xxxvi.  29;  xlviii.  33.— DnjJJ.    See  iii.  14. 

-  T  ■   •  TT    •  : 

Ver.  15.  E'itJ'D  Jeremiah  uses  only  once,  xlix.  25.  The  expression  '3  jj^ltyo  r\2^  is  found  in  Is.  xxiv.  8 ;  comp. 
Hoe.  ii.  13. — ^3ni  see  ver.  2. — 73X7,  see  Am.  viii.  10.  Jeremiah  uses  the  word  three  times,  vi.  26 ;  xvi.  7;  xxxi.  13. — 
^3*7inD,  see  Ps.  xxx.  12;  Jer.  xxxi.  4,  13. 

Ver.  16.  K'KI  JT^tOV,  only  elsewhere  in  Job  xix.  9.  Jeremiah  uses  mtOJ/  once,  xiii.  18. — 'IX  Jeremiah  uses  fre- 
quently ;  iv.  13;  vi.  4;  x.  19;  xiii.  26;  xv.  10;  xlviii.  46.    Also  XJ-'IK.  iv.  81 ;  xlv.  3.    [Owen  insists  on  translating  the 

T 

particle  XJ,   Woe  is  now  to  its.    But  to  one  ignorant  of  the  Hebrew,  the  noiv  would  inevitably  be  taken  in  Its  temporal 

T 

sense,  which  the  Hebrew  particle  never  has.    The  E.  V.  is  followed  by  all  the  English  translators,  except  Owen. — W.  H.  H.j 
— IJXtan  ^2,  see  Jer.  iii.  25  ;  viii.  14;  xiv.  7,  20. 

T  T  ' 

Ver.  17.  nn,  seei.  13,  22.— :|J'ry  OCT!  occurs  elsewhere  only  in  Ps.  Ixix.  24. — "WVi,  see  iv.  8. 

VT  •■'■■        -.u  ,  ,  •  -T 

Ver.  18.  DOB? tJ?,  see  Jer.  xii.  11 ;  Dan.  ix.  17. — ^if  rdat.,  ii.  15. — U^i^W,  Jeremiah  never  uses  the  word.   He  expresses 

V    TV  •    T  I 

the  same  idea  otherwise,  ix.  10 ;  x.  22 ;  xlix.  33  ;  Ii.  37. — Jeremiah  never  uses  the  P.iel  ^971,  see  Ps.  Ixxxix.  16. 


EXEQETICAL   AND  CRITICAL. 

[Vers.  14-18  depict  the  depressing  eflfects  of 
these  various  wrongs  and  humiliations  on  the 
feelings  and  deportment  of  the  people. — W.H.  H.] 

Ver.  14.  The  elders  have  ceased  from  the 
gate,  the  young  men  from  their  music. 
[The  German  language  enables  Gerlach  to  give 
a  verbally  literal  translation :  Die  Aeltesten 
feiern  vom  Thor,  die  Jiinglinge  von  ihrem  Sai- 
tenspiel.  We  have  no  words  in  Englisli  that  so 
accurately  translate  flDiy  and  nJUJ.  Noyes' 
translation,  which  is  also  Luther's — The  elders 
sit  no  more  at  the  gate  ;  the  young  men  have  ceased 
from  their  music — restricts  the  meaning  of  the 
first  clause,  mistranslates  the  verb,  and  renders 
it  necessary  to  supply  a  verb  in  the  second  clause. 
The  idea  is  not  merely  that  the  elders  no  longer 
occupy  their  seats  in  the  gates, — but  that  they 
rest  or  cease  from  all  those  duties  and  pleasures 
that  pertain  to  their  age  and  dignity.  While 
elders  here  designate  old  men,  in  antithesis  to 


young  men,  it  is  not  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
official  elders,  who  are  regarded  as  types  and 
representatives  of  those  past  middle-life, — of 
those  who  especially  delighted  in  resorting  to  the 
gates  of  the  city,  whether  their  official  duties 
called  them  there  or  not.  Henderson:  "It  is 
common  in  the  East  for  aged  men  to  meet  in  the 
open  space  without  the  gate  of  the  city,  to  pass 
the  time  in  narrating  or  hearing  the  news  of 
the  day,  or  the  stories  of  bygone  years.  From 
this  an  easy  transition  is  made  to  the  jocund 
pastime  of  the  young." — W.  H.  H.]  The  gate  was, 
as  it  were,  the  court  of  the  elders  of  the  people, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  the  principal  place  of 
social  entertainment.  See  Winer,  R.  W.  B.  s.  v. 
Thore.  For  this  reason,  and  also  on  account  of 
the  second  clause  of  the  verse,  we  must  consider, 
not  only  the  discontinuance  of  public  business, 
but  the  loss  of  that  pleasure  which  the  gate 
atforded  to  the  older  men.  The  young  men 
from  their  music.  Thenius  remarks  correctly 
that  Jeremiah  "in  the  threatenings,  vii.  34  and 
xvi.  9,  expresses  himself  concerning  the  loss  of 


CHAP.  V.  14-18. 


18: 


happiness  in  a  way  similar  to  this,  and  yet  differ- 
ing from  what  is  said  here."  [To  suppose  this 
verse  to  refer  especially  to  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
(Calvin)  is  in  itself  absurd.  There  were  no 
longer  gates,  elders,  or  young  men  in  Jerusalem, 
of  whom  these  things  could  be  said.  Through- 
out this  song,  the  Prophet  generalizes  and  does 
not  particularize  with  reference  to  times  and 
places.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  15.  Whilst,  as  has  been  said,  vers.  11-14 
enter  into  details,  vers.  15,  16,  generalize  the 
facts.  [Ver.  14  is  more  closely  connected  with 
what  follows  than  with  what  precedes  it.  It  de- 
scribes the  disheartening  effects,  on  the  minds 
and  conduct  of  the  people,  of  what  had  happened. 
It  does  not  state,  as  all  the  preceding  verses  do, 
some  special  cause  of  humiliation  or  suffering. — 
W.  H.  H.]  The  joy  of  our  heart  is  ceased; 
our  dance  is  turned  into  mourning. — 
[  Ceased  has  the  joy  of  our  heart,  changed  to  mourning 
our  dance.  Is  ceased.  Gataker:  "  Heb.  ^ai;A 
rested:  the  same  term  that  was  before,  ver.  14, 
and  it  may  seem  to  have  some  glance  at  such 
mirth  and  cheer,  as  they  were  wont  to  have  at 
their  solemn  festivals  and  on  their  Sabbaths, 
Deut.  xvi.  11,14;  xxviii.  47,48;  2  Chron.  xxix. 
36;  Ps.  xlii.  4;  Ixxxi.  1,2;  xcii.  1,  2."— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  16.  The  crown  is  fallen  from  our 
head  [marg.  The  croion  of  our  head.  SoBlaynet, 
BooTHEOYD,  Henderson,  Owen.  It  is  more 
literal,  but  bad  English.  The  crown  of  the  head, 
in  English,  is  something  very  different  from  the 
crown  on  the  head.  The  one  cannot  fall  without 
the  head  it  belongs  to.  The  other  may  fall /row 
the  head ;  so  here :  Fallen  has  the  crown  from  our 
head.—W.  H.  H]  Woe  unto  us,  that— /or— 
we  have  sinned.  I  must  regard  the  second 
half  of  this  verse  as  a  conclusion  [«.  e.  of  a  par- 
agraph, or  one  of  the  principal  parts  of  the 
chapter],  corresponding  to  that  of  ver.  7.  I  do 
not,  therefore,  believe  that  ver.  16  is  to  be  con- 
nected with  ver.  17,  and  that  by  the  croion  on  our 
head  is  to  be  understood  "  Jerusalem,  as  a  diadem 
set  upon  Zion  with  its  splendid  palaces"  (The- 
Nius),  although  the  expression  by  itself  could 
have  such  an  interpretation.  Rather,  I  believe 
that  the  first  clause  of  ver.  16  is  in  very  close  con- 
nection with  ver.  15 ;  and  that  the  first  clause 
of  ver.  16  declares,  that  not  only  all  joy,  but  also 
all  honor  has  forsaken  Jerusalem.  The  crown 
on  the  head  of  Jerusalem  had  consisted  in  this, 
that  she  was  great  among  the  nations,  a  princess 
among  the  provinces,  and  perfect  in  beauty,  the  joy 
of  the  whole  earth  (i.  1 ;  ii.  15).  [It  confuses  the 
sense  to  suppose  that  Jerusalem  is  the  subject 
from  whose  head  the  crown  has  fallen.  The 
people  generally  are  the  subject ;  "  the  crown  of 
our  head  has  fallen."  In  the  loss  of  independent 
nationality,  and  of  all  honor  among  the  nations, 
who  now  treated  them  with  the  utmost  contempt, 
the  crown  had  indeed  fallen  from  their  heads. 
However  intimately  related  are  vers.  7  and  16, 
however  striking  and  fine  it  would  be,  rhetori- 
cally considered,  if  each  stood  in  the  position  of 
an  emphatic  conclusion  to  corresponding  strophes 
(if  this  is  poetry),  or  paragraphs  (if  it  is  prose); 
yet,  in  point  of  fact,  each  of  these  verses  is  too 
intimately  connected  with  the  verses  immediately 
following  it,  to  be  separated  from  them  without 
injuring  the  logical  connection  of  the  thoughts. 


— W.  H.  H.] — We  have  sinned !  A  gratifying 
advance  is  observable  here,  in  so  far  as  the  people 
now  openly  and  honorably  confess  their  own 
guilt.     See  iii.  39-42. 

Vers.  17,  18.  These  two  verses  constitute  the 
introduction  to  the  closing  prayer,  vers.  19-22. 
They  refer  to  a  fact  which  must  be  the  cause  of 
deepest  pain  to  a  heart  truly  attached  to  the  theo- 
cracy,— the  desolation  of  the  holy  mountain. 
But  this  gloomy  and  dark  image  constitutes  only 
the  back-ground  for  those  noble  and  consolatory 
thoughts  with  which  the  Bard  (Sanger)  comforts 
himself  in  his  prayer. 

Ver.  17.  For  this  our  heart  is  faint;  for 
these  things  our  eyes  are  dim.  Onthisaccnunt 
is  our  heart  faint,  therefore  are  our  eyes  become  dim. 
For  the  reasons  given  above  we  refer  the  pronomi- 
nal phrases  ni~7j;^,  on  this  account  [i&Toh)  [E.V., 
for  this],  and  nyX"?^,  therefore  (dariiber)  [E.V., 

for  these  things'],  to  what  follows  in  reference  to 
Mount  Zion  in  ver.  18.  [The  objections  to  this 
interpretation  are  insuperable.  1.  In  point  of 
fact,  the  desolation  of  Zion  was  not  the  only,  nor 
the  absorbing  cause  of  grief,  as  is  evident  from 
the  whole  of  the  preceding  part  of  this  Song,  in 
which  abundant  and  terrible  causes  of  distress 
are  given,  without  a  single  allusion  to  the  desola- 
tion of  Zion.     2.   The   second  pronominal  suffix 

n7X~7^  (correctly  translated  in  English  Ver- 
sion, for  these  things)  is  plural,  and  must  include 
more  than  the  first  suffix  HT";^  (/or  this  thitig), 
which  is  singular.  It  is  obvious  that  both  can- 
not refer  to  the  single  statement  in  ver,  18,  that 
Mount  Zion  has  become  desolate.  Nor  can  it  be 
said,  that  two  things  are  stated  in  ver.  18,  name- 
ly, that  Mount  Zion  is  desolate  ;  and  that  the 
foxes  run  upon  it.  For  the  latter  statement  is  a 
mere  expansion  or  illustration  of  the  first:  and 
it  would  be  very  absurd  to  make  the  latter  a 
special  and  additional  cause  of  grief,  regarded  as 
in  any  sense  distinct  from  the  first  great  fact  that 
the  mountain  is  desolate.  3.  This  interpreta- 
tion involves  a  redundancy  of  relative  expository 
phrases,  all  referring  to  the  same  thing,  that  is 
useless,  inelegant,  and  utterly  incongruous  with 
the  prevailing  style  of  composition  in  the  Lamen- 
tations, which  is  terse,  compressed  and  remarka- 
ble for  the  absence  of  words  not  actually  indis- 
pensable, as,  for  example,  of  the  connecting  1 
(which  the  Masorites  were  so  anxious  to  insert), 
and  of  the  repeated  verb,  causing  a  constant  re- 
currence of  the  Zeugma,  see  vers.  2,  3,  6,  8,  11, 
14,  19.     Is  it  likely  that  such  a  writer  would  say, 

on  account  of  this  thing  (HI"/^),  on  account  of  these 

things  (rivN"/^),  on  account  of  (7^)  Mount  Zion, 

etc.,  our  heart  is  faint,  our  eyes  are  dim;  using  three 
relative  expository  phrases,  where  one  would 
have  sufficed  ?  4.  By  referring  the  verse  to  what 
precedes  it,  these  relative  phrases,  instead  of 
being  redundant  and  cumbersome,  become  signi- 
ficant and  impressive.  For  this  (namely,  that  the 
crown  has  fallen  from  our  head  because  we  have 
sinned),  our  heart  is  faint;  for  these  things  (name- 
ly, all  the  evils  that  have  been  recited),  our  eye* 
are  dim.     We  may  then  take  ver.   18  as  an  ad- 


188 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


ditional  reason  for  lamentation,  translating  /Jl, 
on  account  of,  or  take  it  as  an  independent,  but  not 
unrelated,  thought,  translating  7^,  as  to:  see  re- 
marks on  that  verse. — W.  H.  H.] — Our  eyes  are 
dim  [our  eyes  have  become  dim'^.  We  must  regard 
weeping,  according  to  ii.  11,  as  the  immediate 
causae  of  the  eyes  becoming  dim.  [Weeping  sug- 
gests itself  as  a  sufficient  physical  cause,  and  if 
the  Prophet  means  this,  then  our  eyes  have  become 
dim,  is  a  poetical  way  of  intimating  how  greatly 
they  have  wept.  But  there  is  no  allusion  to  tears 
in  the  context;  the  period  of  violent  weeping, 
indeed,  we  may  regard  as  past :  and  the  parallel- 
ism is  better  carried  out  by  regarding  the  dimness 
of  the  eyes  as  the  effect  of  the  faintness  of  the 
heart.  So  Notes:  '■'■our  eyes  are  dim;  i.  e.,i\iTO\xg\\. 
faintness  the  sight  of  our  eyes  departs.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  eyes  are  said  to  be  enlightened 
when  the  strength  is  restored  and  faintness  de- 
parts. See  1  Sam.  xiv.  29."  We  are  not  to  re- 
strict the  thought  to  merely  physical  causes  and 
effects.  The  faintness  of  the  heart  suggests  a 
moral  cause,  the  effect  of  which  would  be  that 
moral  dimness  of  sight  which  ensues,  when  God 
is  no  longer  seen  and  hope  expires.  It  is  this 
underlying  thought  that  connects  ver.  17  with 
ver.  18.— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  18.  Because  of  the  mountain  of 
Zion,  w^hich  is  [has  become']  desolate,  the 
foxes  V7alk  upon  it.  The  Mount  of  Zion  is 
here  evidently  intended,  not  in  the  restricted 
sense,  but  in  the  wider  sense  in  which  it  "in- 
cludes Moriah."  See  Dblitzsch  on  Ps.  ii.  6; 
ix.  12;  Ixxvi.  3,  etc.  [The  name  Zion  is  used 
throughout  the  Lamentations,  with  great  uni- 
formity and  precision,  of  Jerusalem  as  the  theocra- 
tic city,  where  God  has  His  dwelling-place,  and 
always  with  special  reference  to  the  most  sacred 
precincts  of  that  city,  where  were  the  Temple  of 
God  and  the  palace  of  the  king.  Here  the  word 
Mount  makes  the  designation  more  plain.  The 
whole  city,  doubtless,  is  intended ;  but  it  is  the 
city  regarded  as  the  dwelling-place  of  God,  the 
throne  of  the  Theocracy.  Probably  the  word  is 
always  used  by  the  Prophets  in  this  sense;  and 
a  regard  to  this  fact  will  spare  us  the  difficulties 
of  determining  whether  Mount  Moriah,  the  Tem- 
ple mount,  was  included  generically  in  Mount 
Zion,  or  is  always  to  be  distinguished  from  Mount 
Zion. — W.  H.  H.]  —  The  foxes  walk  [have 
walked]  upon  it.  Where  these  beasts  live  the 
habitations  of  men  must  have  ceased  to  exist. 
See  Ps.  Ixiii.  11 ;  comp.  Judg.  xv.  4;  Ez.  xiii.  4. 
It  may  also  be  properly  assumed,  that  if  Jerusa- 
lem had  been  destroyed  within  a  few  weeks,  those 
ravenous  beasts  were  busily  engaged  roaming 
through  its  holy  precinta  seeking  for  the  carcases 

of  the  dead.  [Foxes,  whyw.  Jackals,  Booth- 
KOYD,  Wordsworth,  Gerlaoh.  See  Kitto's 
Cyc.  Bib.  Lit.  If  preying  on  dead  men  was  men- 
tioned, or  even  distinctly  hinted  at,  we  might  be 
fure  that  the  jackal,  or  wolf,  or  some  other 
ravenous  member  of  the  canine  species,  is  proba- 
bly intended  ;  for  foxes  are  not  addicted  to  this. 
A  better  reason  for  supposing  that  jackals  are 
111  ant,  is  the  plural  form  of  the  word  (though 
til  3  could  be  explained  by  the  preference  of  the 
writer  for  terminations  in  D),  as  if  they   went 


about  on  the  Holy  Mount  in  companies  ;  for  the 
jackal  is  a  gregarious,  the  fox  a  solitary  animal. 

But  the  Hebrew  i3~Oyri,  may  mean,  not  walking 
about  on  the  mountain,  but  walking  in  the  fre- 
quentative sense,  or  living  (see  ^vH,  Piel  in  Eccl. 
iv.  16)  in  the  mountain.  In  this  case  the  refer- 
ence would  be  to  these  animals,  whether  foxes 
or  jackals,  having  their  burrows  there,  remaining 
there  permanently  and  undisturbed.  This  gives  a 
better  idea  of  the  utter  desolation  that  reigned 
on  Mount  Zion,  and  is  more  consonant  with  the 
fact,  that  more  than  "a  few  weeks"  must  have 
elapsed  since  the  city  was  completely  destroyed 
and  consumed  to  its  foundations,  and,  therefore, 
there  were  no  corpses  there  to  invite  the  preda- 
tory excursions  of  the  jackals. — But  what  is  the 
connection  of  ver.  18  with  ver.  17  ?     How  is  the 

preposition  /^  to  be  translated  ?  Broughtok 
very  elegantly  preserves  the  obscurity  of  the 
origipal ;  "/br  this  our  heart  is  sick, /or  these 
things  our  eyes  be  dim.  For  Mount  Sion  which 
is  desolate,  the   foxes  walk  upon  it."     We  can 

translate  i^,  as  in  the  preceding  verse,  on  ac- 
count of,  and  then  this  verse  is  immediately  con- 
nected with  the  preceding  verse,  and  assigns  an 
additional  reason,  why  the  heart  is  sick,  and  the 
eyes  dim,  namely,  that  Mount  Zion  is  desolate. 
That  is  the  same  as  saying,  that  God  has  with- 
drawn from  His  people:  their  heart  is  faint  and 
their  eyes  dim  on  account  of  past  and  present 
troubles,  and  also  because  there  is  no  prospect 
of  relief  for  them,  for  God's  house  is  destroyed, 
and  Jehovah  has  forsaken  His  people.  This  is 
excellent  sense,  and  were  there  no  question  as  to 
the  grammatical  construction  we  might  be  satis- 
fied with  it.  But  we  may  translate  7^,  as  to 
(Gerlach,  tiber),  as  to  Mount  Zion  which  has  be- 
come desolate,  the  foxes  have  walked  upon  it.  Thus 
rendered,  this  verse  is  independent  of  the  pre- 
ceding verse  as  to  grammatical  construction,  but 
intimately  related  to  it  in  sense.  This  is  recom- 
mended by  several  considerations.  1.  7^,  by 
itself,  rarely  has  the  sense  of  on  account  of.  2. 
The  VJ,  relativum,  properly  throws  the  idea  con- 
nected with  it  into  a  parenthesis.  If  so,  then  the 
idea  that  Zion  lies  waste,  is  not  the  prominent 
idea,  but  is  subordinate  to  what,  in  itself  is  an 
insignificant  fact,  that  the  foxes  walk  upon  it. 
Surely  that  could  not  constitute  the  climax  of 
their  grief,  who  had  to  lament  for  dishonored 
women,  princes,  and  elders,  and  the  cruellest 
oppression  of  tender  children !  3.  If  the  foxes 
walking  on  Zion  is  a  fact  significant  of  something 
else  of  far  deeper  import  (as  in  truth  it  is,  though 
this  method  of  construction  does  not  suggest  that 
interpretation),  yet  in  such  a  case  it  is  to  be  ob- 
served, that  the  i^  should  be  repeated  before  the 

last  clause.  Our  heart  is  faint,  our  eyes  dim.  Be- 
cause of  Mount  Zion,  because  the  foxes  walk  upon 
it.     In  every  case  the  construction  is  awkward. 

4.  By  taking  7^  in  the  sense  of  as  to,  we  have 
perfect  grammatical  construction :  .45  to  Mount 
Zion,  which  has  become  desolate,  the  foxes  walk  upon 


CHAP.  V.   19-22. 


189 


it!  5.  This  at  once  suggests  the  real  force  of  the 
expression,  the  foxes  walk  upon  it,  and  gives  dig- 
nity to  what  else  would  be  an  insignificant  cul- 
mination point  of  the  sublime  grief  expresssed  in 
what  precedes.  As  to  Mount  Zion,  from  whence 
ought  to  come  our  help  aud  salvation,  the  foxes 
have  it  now  for  their  home  !  It  is  no  longer  the 
dwelling-place  of  God,  and  the  refuge  of  His  peo- 
ple. This  is  no  sentimental  effusion  of  grief,  that 
the  foxes  roam  where  the  proud  and  happy  city 
once  stood.      It  is  the  expression  of  a  terrible 


truth,  that  Jehovah  had  forsaken  His  people ;  and 
what  had  been  His  dwelling-place,  now  laid  waste 
and  destroyed,  is  the  home  of  wild  beasts.  6. 
This  explanation  is  favored  by  the  emphatic 
declaration  that  follows  in  ver.  19,  and  especially 
by  the  emphatic  expression  of  the  personal  pro- 
noun: Thou,  Jehovah  art  forever.  Thy  dwelling- 
place  is  the  home  of  the  wild  beasts,  but  Thou 
Thyself  dost  still  exist,  dost  still  reign,  and  Thy 
people  pray  Thee  to  return  to  them,  and  have 
mercy  upon  them. — W.  H.  H.] 


V.  19-22. 


19       Thou,  O  Lord,  remainest  forever;  thy  throne  from  generation  to  generation. 
20,  21  Wherefore  dost  thou  forget  us  forever,  and  forsake  us  so  long  time  ?     Turn  thou 
22  us  unto  thee,  O  Lord,  and  we  shall  be  turned ;  renew  our  days  as  of  old.     But 
thou  hast  utterly  rejected  us ;  thou  art  very  wroth  against  us. 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

Ver.  19. — [Blatnet  :  "  The  LXX.,  Syr.,  Vulg.  and  Arabic  all  express  the  conjunction  at  the  beginning  of  this  versa 
Two  MSS.  read  riflXI,  and  so  it  is  found  in  the  notes  of  the  celebrated  printed  Bible,  No.  300"] — SD3,  frequently  in  Jere- 
miah, i.  15  ;  iii.  17,  efc. — "im  Tn 7  Jeremiah  never  uses.     He  says  only  once  im    ^n   1^,1.39.     [The  writer  who  only 

T  :  T  - 

once  used  a  common  expression  with  a  common  preposition,  is  thf  very  one  who  would  be  likely  only  once  to  use  the  same 

expression  with  another  preposition. — W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  20.— nVjS,  Jer.  iii.  5;  1.39.— n^t^,  Jer.  ii.  32;  iii.  21,  etc.— 3Ij;,  Jer.  ii.  13 ;  xii.  7,  ete.— IIK  Jeremiah  uevsr 
uses.     See  Ps.  xxiii.  6;  xciii.  5. 

Ver.  21. — The  verb  \il'^^\  (except  here,  used  only  in  Piel  and  Hiph.)  is  not  found  in  Jeremiah. — DTDJ,  see  Jer.  xxx.  30. 

-T  .  vlv: 

Ver.  22. — DNID,  Jer-  J'iv.  19,  ii.37;  vi.  30,  etc. — ^Yp,  Jer.  xxxvii.  5. — IKD  Jeremiah  uses  twice,  xviii.  13;  xlviii.  16; 

^KD~^J7  never.     [Poor  little  '\^,  slighted  by  Jeremiah  twice!  takes  its  revenge  by  having  the  last  word  to  say  against  his 

authorship  of  the  Lamentations. — W.  H.  H.] 


EXEGETICAL   AND   CRITICAL. 

Vers.  19-22.  This  short  prayer  contains  four 
thoughts.  1.  A  positive  source  of  consolation; 
the  throne  of  the  Lord  stanJs  immovably  fast, 
ver.  19.  2.  A  question :  Why  then  should  the 
Lord  forget  His  people  forever  ?  ver.  20.  3.  A 
petition  :  that  the  Lord  would  re-establish  His 
people  spiritually  and  temporally,  ver.  21.  4. 
A  negative  source  of  consolation:  the  Lord  can- 
not be  angry  forever,  ver.  22. 

Ver.  19.  Thou,  O  LORD,— T'/io?/.  Jehovah. 
[Blay.\ey,  Boothroyd,  Noyks:  But  Thou,  Jeho- 
vah. See  Textual  notes  above.  Whether  the  1 
originally  belonged  to  the  text  or  not,  the  em- 
phatic expression  of  the  personal  pronoun  XjlX, 
and  the  parallelism  between  vers.  18  and  19,  in- 
volve the  sense  of  but,  yet,  or  as  to,  before  the 
pronoun.  As  to  Zion,  it  is  desolate, — but  Thou 
endurest  forever,  or  as  to  Thee,  though  Thy  dwel- 
ling-place is  gone.  Thou  endurest.  Gataker  in- 
dicates this  in  this  brief  note,  '■'But,  or  Yet,  to 
be  supplied." — W.  H.  H.]. — Remainest  for- 
ever,— [lit.,  sittest  forever.  But  when  this  is 
said  of  God  or  of  human  monarchs,  it  always 
refers  to  their  occupying  the  throne;  see  Ps.  Ixi. 
8  (7);  ix.  5  (4),  12  (11);  Zech.  vi.  13.  The 
king  sits,  the  subject  stands.  Tlie  instant  men- 
tion of  the  throne,  shows  lluit  this  must  be  the 
meaning  here.     Not  God's  continual  existence, 


but  His  uninterrupted  sovereignty  over  His  crea- 
tures. Henderson  and  Noyes  translate,  sittest  as 
king.  But  this  seems  to  lower  the  thought  to  a  com- 
parison with  human  monarchs.  Though  God  is 
called  and  is  a  King,  yet  it  is  not  as  any  ordinai-y 
king  that  He  occupies  the  throne  Gerlach 
translates.  Thou  art  enthroned  forever.  This  pro- 
duces a  slight  tautology.  Thou  reignest  forever 
(Gataker),  may,  perhaps,  be  as  accurate  a 
translation  of  the  word,  as  our  English  affords. 
— W.  H.  H.]. — Thy  throne  from  generation 
to  generation.  See  Ps.  xlv.  7;  Ixxxix.  5; 
xciii.  2.  In  opposition  to  the  desolation  of  the 
external  sanctuary,  the  Poet  holds  up  before 
himself  the  consolation,  that  the  Lord  Himself 
nevertheless  sits  firmly  on  His  throne  and  His 
kingdom  remains  immovable.  The  heathen  could 
destroy  the  Temple  ;  to  the  Lord  Himself  they 
could  do  no  harm.  See  Ps.  ix.  8  (7) ;  xxix.  10, 
cxlvi.  10 ;   cxxv.  1. 

Ver.  20.  Wherefore  dost  thou  forget  us 
forever,  and  forsake  us  so  long  time?  ( marg. 
for  length  of  days).  ^yhy  shnuldest  Thou  forever 
forget  us,  and  forsake  us  for  long  time  ?  It  ought 
to  be  distinctly  observed,  that  it  is  not  said 
^jrinpiZ;,  Thou  hast  forgotten,  ^Ji"^3T||,  Thou  hast 
forsaken.  The  Poet  does  not  ask,  Why  hast  Thou 
forgotten  and  forsaken  us  forever?  But  why 
wouldst  or  shouldst  Thou  forsake  us  forever' 
That  He  would  do  this,  the  Poet  cannot  belif^re. 
See  Ps.  Ixxiv.  2    (1) ;  Ixxvii.  8-10  (7-9).     [Aa 


im 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OP  JEUEMIAH. 


Owen  has  suggested,  we  are  undoubtedly  to  re- 
gard this  as  a  prayer  for  present  and  immediate 
relief.  The  Prophet  well  understood  that  the 
captivity  would  not  end  before  seventy  years. 
That  for  that  time  at  least  Zion  must  remain 
desolate.  He  also  firmly  believed  that  after  that 
time,  the  people  would  return  to  their  own  land, 
and  God  would  dwell  on  Mount  Zion.  He  could 
not  therefore  ask,  with  any  reference  to  the 
possibility  of  such  a  thing,  if  God  intended  to 
forsake  the  Jewish  people  forever  ?  But  what 
He  does  ask  is,  if  He  would  forever  or  alwai/s 
(nVJ,  constantly,  continuously)  forget  and  forsake 
for  length  of  days,  for  a  long  period  of  time,  or 
for  all  their  life-time,  that  suffering  generation 
of  His  people?  Would  He  leave  them  in  their 
present  misery  without  any  relief,  any  show  of 
mercy  ?  Though  Zion  was  desolate,  and  God 
had  withdrawn  His  theocratic  presence  from  the 
people,  and  the  Prophet  knew  that  He  would  not 
in  that  sense  return  to  the  people  again,  till  that 
sinful  generation  was  dead,  yet,  he  says,  Thou 
still  art  God,  Thou  reignest  forever,  Thy  throne 
remains  unmoved  by  any  mundane  events, — why 
then  shouldst  Thou  continuously,  persistently 
forget  us  and  completely  abandon  us  to  our  pre- 
sent sorrow  ?  The  pronoun  us  here,  embraces 
the  persons  of  those  embraced  by  the  us  in  the 
preceding  verses  of  the  Song.  Had  he  intended 
the  people  as  such,  and  not  the  people  individu- 
ally considered,  he  would  probably  have  used 
some  such  designation  as  the  daughter  of  Thy 
people,  or  simply  Thy  people.  The  prayer  as 
thus  interpreted  was  answered.  Long  before 
the  captivity  ended,  God  had  mercy  on  the  suf- 
ferers, gave  them  favor  in  the  eyes  of  men,  and 
relieved  them  from  many  of  their  distresses. 
The  verse  then  ought  to  be  translated.  Wherefore 
shouldst  Thou  always  forget  us,  shouldst  Thou  aban- 
don us — i.  e.  to  our  present  misery— :/b7-  le?igth  of 
days,  that  is,  for  any  long  but  indefinite  period 
of  time  ?— W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  21.  Turn  Thou  us  unto  Thee,  O 
LORD — Jehovah — and  we  shall  be  turned. 
The  Poet  well  knows  that  a  restoration  is  possi- 
ble ;  but  he  also  knows  its  conditions.  He  has 
before  his  eyes  what  is  said  in  Jer.  xxxi.  16-22; 
ill.  1-4,  12,  in  which  the  idea  2W  [to  turn]  is 
employed  in  a  variety  of  ways. — The  words 
nn^E/jl  -U^'C^/n  [turn  us  and  we  shall  turn']  are  a 
direct  quotation  from  Jer.  xxxi.  18.  See  re- 
marks on  that  passage.  Comp.  Ps.  Ixxx.  4  (3), 
8  (7),  20  (19).  The  question  is  whether  the 
Poet  prayed  only  for  temporal,  or  only  for  spi- 
ritual restoration  ?  It  is  in  point  of  fact  not 
imaginable,  that  there  could  be  one  without  the 
other.  But  he  knows  that  in  order  to  either 
kind  of  restoration,  the  Lord  must  take  the 
initiative.  And  especially,  first  of  all,  He  must 
lead  back  the  people  to  Himself.  Only  when  the 
Lord  has  accomplished  this — but  then  most  cer- 
tainly— will  ilie  people  return  back  to  the  Lord 
and  to  tlie  place  of  His  gracious  presence  and  so 
be  restored  to  the  old  covennnt  relationship. 
[There  arc  ihree  ways  of  iiiidorstandirig  tliis 
prayer,  which  Dr.  Naeoei.suach  lias  not  ilistin- 
t;uishi'd  with  liis  usual  iidmir.ihle  pei-spicuity. 
1.  It  can  lie  understood  ns  a  prayer  tor  tlie  re- 
storatiun  of  the  old  condition  of  things,  involv- 


ing a  return  to  their  own  land.  Owen  :  "  '  Tht 
meaning  of  this  sentence  is,'  says  Grotics,  '  Re- 
store us  to  Thy  favor,  that  we  may  be  restored 
to  our  ancient  state.'  Were  this  evidently  the 
meaning,  the  rendering  ought  to  be  thus, — Restore 
us,  O  Jehovah,  to  Thyself ,  that  we  7nay  be  restored." 
It  is  obvious  that  the  words  so  translated  do  not 
express  what  is  claimed  for  them.  Restore  us  to 
Thyself,  that  we  may  be  restored,  can  only  mean 
that  we  may  be  restored  to  Thyself.  This  might 
involve  as  a  consequence  the  return  of  the 
"  ancient  state."  But  if  that  had  been  the  main 
idea,  it  would  have  been  difi"erently  expressed. 
Besides  people  are  apt  to  pray  for  what  they 
most  need  and  are  likely  to  get.  The  pressing 
need  of  the  people  now,  was  instant  relief  from 
sulFering.  This  they  might  have  without  a  re- 
turn to  their  land.  The  latter  they  could  not 
expect  for  themselves,  and  were  sure  that  it 
would  come   eventually  to  a  future   generation. 

2.  In  a  strictly  theocratic  sense.  That  God  would 
bring  them  back  to  Himself  and  they  be  restored 
to  His  favor  and  blessed  with  all  the  blessings 
of  the  covenant.  This  would  not  involve  neces- 
sarily an  immediate  return  to  their  own  land ; 
and  gives  a  good  sense.  Yet  it  does  not  seem 
fully  to  express  the  natural  meaning  of  the 
words.  Nor  is  it  grammatically  correct  to  take 
2W1  in  a  passive,  instead  of   an  active  sense. 

3.  It  can  be  regarded  as  a  prayer  for  converting 
grace.  Turn  Thou  us  to  Thyself  and  we  shall  turn, 
i.  e.  to  Thee.  This  is  the  simplest  and  most 
natural  translation.  It  is  consistent  with  the 
fact,  that  the  people  throughout  this  Song,  while 
speaking  collectively,  are  yet  regarded  as  indi- 
viduals. It  harmonizes  with  the  evident  mean- 
ing of  ver.  20.  It  is  such  a  prayer  as  was  emi- 
nently proper  in  their  circumstances.  It  is 
consistent  with  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  Bible 
in  regard  to  converting  grace,  or  the  grace  of 
repentance.  Finally,  it  prepares  the  way  for  the 
final  petitition,  renew  our  days  as  of  old. — W.  H. 
H.]. — Renew  our  days  as  of  old.  The  con- 
struction is  a  prolepsis.  Renew  our  days,  i.  e. 
vitam,  vitse  conditionem.  Job  x.  6,  so  that  the}'  may 
be  as  they  were  formerly.  [This  petition  is 
general  and  comprehensive.  It  reaches  forward 
to  the  time  when  all  they  had  possessed  and  en- 
joyed would  be  theirs  again  as  a  people, — Coun- 
try, Temple,  Priest,  Prophet,  and  King.  But  it 
does  not  require  the  instant  or  even  speedy  ful- 
filment of  these  things ;  nor  does  this  petition 
afi'ord  any  ground  for  the  argument  (Owkn)  that 
the  preceding  petition  must  be  of  the  same  pur- 
port.—W.  H.  H.] 

Ver.  22.  But  Thou  hast  utterly  rejected 
us;  (marg.  For  wilt  Thou  utterly  reject  us 'I ]  Thou 
art  very  -wroth  against  us.  Or  hast  Thou 
wholly  rejected  us,  and  art  exceedingly  angry  with 
u.'i?  The  verse  contains,  as  remarked  above,  a 
negative  fundamental  statement.  The  meaning 
of  the  conjunction  DN  ^2  [but,  except,  unless]  is, 
it  7nay  he  then  that.  See  Gen.  xxviii.  17;  Is.  xlii. 
19;  i?rov.  iii.  12  ;  my  Or.  g  110,  4,  note,  Ew.\ld, 
I  .3.3f).  The  idea  of  realization  is  to  be  supplied 
before  tlie  conjunction,  from  the  foregoing 
prayer;  this  will  be  done,  unless  Thou  7nayest 
have  utterly  abandoned  us.  [Calvin  :  Except  Thou 
hast  wholly  rejected  us,  and  hast  become  very  angry 


CHAP.  V,  19-22. 


191 


vith  us.  BooTHROYD  puts  the  first  clause  inter- 
rogatively, For  wilt  Thou  altogether  cast  us  offi 
Thou  hast  been  wroth  against  us  exceedingly .  But 
both  verbs  are  preterites,  and  neither  can  be 
taken  in  a  future  sense.  For  the  same  reason, 
the  verbs  cannot  be  translated  as  Noyes  renders 
them,  taking  both  clauses  interrogatively,  For 
ahouldst  Thou  utterly  reject  us  ?  Shouldst  Thou  be 
to  exceedingly  wroth  against  us  ?  We  must  either 
accept  the  sense  of  Dr.  Naegelsbach's  transla- 
tion, with  which  Calvin  and  Gerlach  agree,  or 
accept  the  text  of  the  English  Version,  with 
which  agree  Sept.,  Syr.,  Arab.,  Vulg.,  Targ., 
Broughton,  Blayney,  Henderson,  and  Owen, 
an  imposing  weight  of  authority.  If  we  adopt 
the  latter  sense,  then  we  must  accept  of  Owen's 
as  the  only  possible  explanation,  that  the  re- 
ference is  to  themselves  as  individuals,  not 
as  representatives  of  the  Jewish  race.  They 
knew  that  God  had  not  utterly  rejected  the 
nation.  They  knew  that  as  a  nation,  they 
would  be  restored  to  their  land.  In  either 
case,  the  opinion  that  this  prayer  is  a  prayer  for 
immediate  relief  as  individuals,  and  not  for  final 
restoration  as  a  nation,  is  evident.  For,  if  we 
adopt  the  sense  of  the  text  of  the  English  version, 
we  cannot  believe  that  Jeremiah  meant  to  an- 
nounce the  utter  rejection  of  the  nation  ;  and  if 
we  prefer  the  sense  of  the  margin  of  the  English 
version,  we  cannot  believe  that  Jeremiah  would 
close  this  magnificent  poem  with  a  question  in- 
volving the  possibility  of  God's  utter  rejection 
of  the  whole  nation.  Rather,  we  must  regard 
these  closing  words  as  one  last  plaintive  cry  for 
mercy, — unless  Thou  hast  utterly  rejected  us,  who 
are  now  in  misery,  and  hast  become  exceedingly 
angry  with  us,  so  that  Thy  wrath  cannot  be  ap- 
peased, and  the  mercy,  we  implore  in  vain  for 
ourselves,  is  to  be  reserved  for  another  and  more 
pious  generation  of  Israelites. — W.  H.  H.] 

Tlje  Hebrew  codices  repeat,  for  the  purpose  of 
synagogue  reading,  after  ver.  22,  the  words  of 
ver.  21,  as  they  do  also  [repeat  the  verse  before 
the  last,  after  the  last  verse]  at  the  close  of 
Isaiah,  Malachi,  and  Ecclesiastes,  "in  order  to 
close  with  consolatory  words."  See  Delitzsch, 
Is.  p.  651.  [Hugh  Broughton  :  Turn  us,  0 
Eternal,  unto  Thee,  and  we  shall  return  ;  renew  our 
days  as  of  old.  The  ver.  21  is  one  of  the  four 
which,  in  the  Massoretli  Bible,  are  printed  as  a 
postscript  for  better  memory.  Another  is  the 
last  save  one  in  Ecclesiastes,  another  the  last 
save  one  in  Esay,  the  fourth  the  last  save  one  in 
Malachi,  as  I  noted  upon  Ecclesiastes.  These 
sayiiitrs  contain  the  main  of  the  writers.  That 
in  Ecclesiastes  biddeth  us  look  for  all  happiness 
in  the  world  to  come,  that  of  Esay  telleth  how 
all  Moyses'  policy  shall  end.  That  of  Malachi 
showeth  how  John  Baptist  shall  begin  the  New 
Testament.  And  this  of  Jeremy  telleth  that  God 
will  begin  a  new  state  for  his  people.  Upon  that 
they  studied  in  Babylon  fifty  years,  and  they 
made  themselves  a  golden  age,  knowing  that  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  was  in  sufi'ering.  Afterwards 
they  are  plainly  told  of  the  true  kingdom,  and 
be  renewed,  as  of  old.  This  verse  was  given  in 
the  beginning  of  the  captivity  for  a  comfort  that 
way."  Wordsworth:  ^' Turn  Thou  us  unto  Thee, 
0  Lord,  and  ice  shall  be  turned.  A  very  appro- 
priate prayer  for  Israel  weeping  over  the  ruins 


of  Jerusalem, — destroyed  first  by  the  Chaldeaa 
armies,  and  next,  on  the  anniversary  of  the  same 
day,  by  the  power  of  Rome,  for  its  sins.  Israel 
says,  '  Turn  Thou  us,  0  Lord,  and  we  shall  be 
turned  ;'  and  the  Apostle  of  Israel,  the  great 
Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews,  St.  Paul,  says,  '  Even 
unto  this  day,  when  Moses  is  read,  the  veil  is 
upon  their  heart.  Nevertheless,  when  it  shall 
turn  unto  the  Lord,  the  veil  shall  be  taken  away' 
(2  Cor.  iii.  15,  16).  May  He  hasten  the  time! 
Then  the  dirge  of  Lamentation  will  be  changed 
into  a  jubilee  of  joy."] 

DOCTRINAL   AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  Ver.  1.  Remember,   O  LORD.     "It  is 

unworthy  of  the  majesty  of  God  to  impute  the 
fault  of  forgetfulne&s  to  Him,  but  He  may  be  en- 
treated to  be  mindful  or  to  remember,  in  order 
to  render  speedy  assistance  to  the  needy,  and  thus 
make  manifest  what  \_viz.  His  remembrance]  was 
beforeconcealed."  RHABANUsinGHisLER.,p.  213. 

2.  Ver.  1.  [Consider,  and  behold.  Calvin: 
"  The  words,  though  brief  and  concise,  yet  con- 
tain a  useful  doctrine,  that  God  is  pleased  to 
bring  help  to  the  miserable  when  their  evils 
come  to  an  account  before  Him,  especially  when 
they  are  unjustly  oppressed.  It  is  indeed  cer- 
tain, that  nothing  is  unknown  to  God,  but  this 
mode  of  speaking  is  according  to  the  perceptions 
of  men;  for  we  think  that  God  disregards  our 
miseries,  or  we  imagine  that  His  back  is  turned 
to  us  when  He  docs  not  immediately  succor  us. 
But  He  is  simply  to  be  asked  to  look  on  our  evils, 
.  .  .  as  soon  as  He  is  pleased  to  look  on  the  evils 
we  suffer,  aid  is  at  the  same  time  prepared  for 
us." — Our  reproach.  Calvin:  "There  is  men- 
tion especially  made  of  reproach,  that  the  indig- 
nity might  move  God  the  more ;  for  it  was  for 
this  end  that  He  took  the  people  under  His 
protection,  that  they  might  be  for  His  glory  and 
honor,  as  Moses  says.  As  then,  it  was  God's  will 
that  the  riches  of  His  glory  should  appear  in  that 
people,  nothing  could  have  been  more  inconsis- 
tent than  that,  instead  of  gloi-y,  they  should 
have  nothing  but  disgrace  and  reproach.  This, 
then,  is  the  reason  why  the  Prophet  makes  a 
special  mention  of  the  reproach  of  the  people.'  ] 

3.  Ver.  1.  "  He  does  not  say,  '  Remember,  0 
Lord,  our  enemies,  that  they  may  suffer  as  their 
deeds  deserve,'  but,  'Be  mindful  of  what  has 
happened  to  us,'  as  if  he  would  say  in  efi'ect, 
'  Remembering  the  evils  which  we  suffer  take 
them  away,  but  overlook  the  doers  of  them.' 
When  he  says,  'What  has  happened,'  or  'what 
has  been  done  to  us,'  he  discriminates  between 
what  we  suffer  and  what  is  natural  [normal], 
for  these  evils  are  not  natural  or  normal,  but 
accidental,  resulting  from  the  manifold  efi"ects 
of  sin."    Paschasius  in  Ghisler.,  p.  213. 

4.  Ver.  1.  "The  cross  seems  all  the  lighter 
when  we  lament  over  it  to  a  true,  confidential 
friend,  and  show  him  how  it  pains  us,  and  he 
with  brotherly  sympathy  or  good  advice,  removes 
from  us  a  part  of  our  burden.  But  men  cannot 
always  help  us,  however  sincerely  they  desire  to 
do  so.  But  he  who  commends  his  afi'airs  to  God, 
complains  to  the  right  and  faithful  Helper,  who 
has  invited  us  to  pray  to  Him  (Ps.  xiii.  6;  xxvii. 
8;  xxxvii.  5;  Iv.  23;  Sir.  iL  11)."    Egid.  Hun- 


192 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


Nius.  "In  aJversity  we  should  not,  with  the 
Papists,  fly  for  assistance  to  the  dead,  who  are 
ignorant  of  our  afflictions  (Is.  Ixiii.  16;)  nor,  with 
the  superstitious  and  profane,  to  magicians  and 
wizards  (Is.  viii.  19,  20) ;  but,  after  the  example 
of  the  church  in  this  passage,  we  should  fly  to 
the  Lord  (Hos.  vi.  1-3  [E.  V.  Hos.  v.  15-vi.  2]  ; 
2  Chr.  XX.  12)."  Forster. 

5.  Vers.  2-16.  "  Because  everything  contained 
in  this  list  of  evils  was  long  before  predicted 
to  the  Israelites  with  the  greatest  exactness  [lit. 
to  a  very  hair's  breadth^  in  the  ancient  Mosaic 
list  [of  curses],  contained  in  the  twenty-eighth 
chapter  of  Deuteronomy,  ...  we  learn  from  the 
agreement  of  the  Mosaic  list  with  the  manifest 
eventu  or  fulfilment  in  the  captive  people  of  Ju- 
dah,  how  the  threateninga,  contained  for  us  in 
God's  word  are  to  be  regarded,  not  as  mere 
empty,  inefficient  words  to  terrify  us,  but  for  an 
undoubted,  sure,  and  certain  reckoning  and  list, 
whereby  Gods  temporal  and  eternal  wrath  from 
Heaven  against  the  ungodly  is  revealed  and 
threatened,  as  it  is  written  in  the  first  chapter 
of  Romans."  Egid.  Hunnius.  "  This  is  useful, 
that  we  may  carry  the  cup  straight,  and  look  well 
to  ourselves,  lest  it  may  happen  to  us  in  the  same 
way  that  faith  comes  to  be  experience."  Cramer. 

6.  Ver.  2.  "  That  these  things  may  not  happen 
to  us  also,  let  us  be  pious,  upright,  and  tempe- 
rate in  the  acquisition,  possession,  and  use  of  our 
property ;  in  reference  to  which  Paul  admonishes 
us  in  1  Cor.  vii.  30,  31,  that  while  we  are  in  the 
world,  we  should  not  use  the  world  [Vulg.],  that 
we  may  have  worldly  possessions,  but  should 
possess  them  as  though  we  had  them  not.  Be- 
sides that  threefold  woe  of  Habakkuk  (ii.  6) 
presses  hard  upon  us.  Use  is  commendable, 
abuse  criminal  "  Forster. 

7.  Ver.  8.  Our  mothers  are  as  ■widovvs. 
"  By  mothers  are  intended  the  seven  synagogues, 
which  are  known  to  have  been  established  prin- 
cipally on  the  Mount  Olives,  from  which  flowed 
the  milk  of  doctrine.  .  .  .  But  in  the  time  of  the 
siege  or  of  the  Chaldean  ravages,  their  children 
having  been  removed,  they  were  abandoned  and 
consumed  with  fire."  Paschasius  in  Ghisler., 
p.  214. 

8.  Vers.  4,  6,  9,  10.  "  We  learn  especially  how 
God  punishes  the  misuse  of  His  gifts  of  plenty 
and  abundance  ;  when,  for  instance,  men  are  not 
thankful  to  God  in  times  of  profusion  and  cheap- 
ness, but  squander  useles.sly  His  gifts,  wine  and 
fruits  of  the  earth,  by  gormandizing  and  carous- 
ing, gluttonizing  and  guzzling,  banqueting  and 
tippling  ;  tlien  God  withdraws  His  blessings  and 
gifts ;  food  becomes  scarce  so  that  it  is  not  easily 
procured  ;  and  He  sends  a  famine  so  that  water 
and  precious  bread  can  hardly  be  obtained,  as 
was  the  case  with  the  Jewish  people.  But  they 
had  well  deserved  it  by  their  rioting,  which  the 
Prophet  Isaiah  long  before  rebuked,  when  he 
enu:aorated,  among  otlier  gross  vices  oFthe  house 
of  Judah,  drunkenness  also,  and  called  down  a 
woe  upon  ii  (Is.  v.  11-13,  comp.  Amos  vi.  4-7)  .  .  . 
But  the  punishment  terminates  not  in  temporal 
poverty.  Excessive  indulgence  in  eating  and 
drinking  is  such  a  pernicious  vice  that  a  man 
forfeits  thereby  his  part  in  the  Kingdom  of  Hea- 
ven (1  Cor.  vi.  9,  10),  and  must  be  deprived  of 
•ternal    happiness,  and   must  suffer   thirst  with 


the  rich  drunkard  eternally  in  the  flames  of  Hell 
(Luke  xvi.  ;   Is.  v.  14)."  Egid.  Hunnius. 

9.  Ver.  6.  "  According  to  the  real  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew,  the  church  weeps  for  lier  children, 
when  members  of  Christ  and  ministers  of  the 
altar,  for  the  sake  of  earthly  things,  give  the 
hand  to  those  more  powerful  or  to  worldly  men, 
who  are  rendered  foul  by  the  blackness  of  their 
[ill-gotten]  wealth  or  other  crimes."  Paschasius 
in  Ghisler.,  p.  216. 

10.  Ver.  7.  "Undeservedly,  0  Roman,  must 
thou  pay  the  penalty  for  the  sins  of  thine  ances- 
tors." Horace,  Odes,  B.  III.,  Ode  6.  "Already 
have  we  sufficiently  expiated  the  perjury  of  the 
Laomedonian  Troy  with  our  blood."  Virgil. 
Georg.  I.,  501,  2.  "This  is  rightly  lamented  in 
the  church  also,  that  when  the  priests  and  the 
princes  of  the  earth  are  delinquent,  for  their  faults, 
as  it  were,  the  people  are  punished."  Paschasius 
in  Ghisler.,  p.  218.  "When  their  kings  act  the 
fool,  the  Greeks  are  punished."   Horace. 

11.  Ver.  7.  [Pool's  Annot. :  "We  must  not 
understand  this  in  the  same  sense  as  Ez.  xviii. 
2,  where  God  reflecteth  upon  them  for  using  a 
proverb  to  this  sense.  It  is  the  Prophet  who 
here  speaketh,  and  in  the  name  of  the  godly 
Jews,  who  would  not  excuse  themselves  as  if 
they  sufi"ered  merely  for  their  forefathers'  sins. 
But  the  Prophet  confesseth  and  bewaileth  that 
God  had  punished  their  iniquities  and  the  iniqui- 
ties of  their  forefathers  together ;  and  it  was 
better  with  their  forefathers  who  had  sinned, 
and  were  dead  and  gone,  than  with  them,  upon 
whom  the  punishment  of  their  iniquity  did  abide, 
and  was  like  so  to  do  for  a  long  time." — Out 
fathers  have  sinned,  and  are  not.  Calvin: 
"  Our  Prophet's  object  was  to  turn  God  to  mercy  ; 
and  to  attain  this  object  he  says,  '  0  Lord,  Thou 
indeed  hast  hitherto  executed  just  punishment, 
because  our  fathers  had  very  long  abused  Thy 
goodness  and  forbearance ;  but  now  the  time  has 
come  for  Thee  to  try  and  prove  whether  we  are 
like  our  fathers;  as  then,  they  have  perished  as 
they  deserved,  receive  us  now  into  favor.'  We 
hence  see  that  thus  no  quarrel  or  contention  is 
carried  on  with  God,  but  only  that  the  miserable 
exiles  ask  God  to  look  on  them,  since  their  fathers, 
who  had  provoked  God  and  had  experienced  His 
dreadful  vengeance,  were  already  dead." — And 
•we  have  borne  their  iniquities.  Calvin  : 
"  When  he  says  that  the  sons  bore  the  iniquities 
of  the  fathers,  though  it  be  a  strong  expression, 
yet  its  meaning  is  not  as  though  God,  without 
reason,  punished  their  children  and  not  their 
fathers;  for  unalterable  is  that  declaration,  'The 
son  shall  not  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  father,  nor 
tiie  father  the  iniquity  of  the  son ;  but  the  soul 
that  sinneth  it  shall  die'  (Ez.  xviii.  20).  It  may 
yet  be  said  that  the  children  are  loaded  with  the 
sins  of  their  fathers,  because  God,  as  He  declares 
by  Moses,  extends  His  vengeance  to  the  third 
and  fourth  generation  (Ex.  xx.  6).  And  He  says 
also  in  another  place,  '  1  will  return  into  the 
bosom  of  children  the  iniquity  of  tixeir  fathers' 
(Jer.  xxxii.  18).  God  theu  continued  His  ven- 
geance to  their  posterity.  But  yet  there  is  no 
doubt  but  that  the  children  who  had  been  so 
severely  punished,  bore  also  the  punishment  of 
their  own  iniquity,  for  tliey  deserved  a  hundred 
deaths.    But  these  two  things  well  agree  together, 


CHAP.  V. 


103 


that  God  returns  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  into 
the  bosom  of  their  children,  and  yet  that  the 
children  are  chastised  for  their  own  sins." 
Henkt  :  "  They  acknowledge  the  reproach  of  sin 
wliich  they  bear.  This  comes  in,  in  the  midst 
of  their  complaints,  but  may  well  be  put  in  the 
front  of  them.  This  is  not  here  a  peevish  com- 
plaint, or  an  imputation  of  unrighteousness  to 
God,  like  what  we  have  in  Jer.  xxxi.  29 ;  Ez. 
xviii.  2,  but  a  penitent  confession  of  the  sins  of 
their  ancestors,  which  they  themselves  had  also 
persisted  in,  for  which  they  now  justly  suffered. 
Thus  they  submit  themselves  to  the  Divine  justice, 
and  refer  themselves  to  the  Divine  pity.  And, 
truly,  the  sins  God  looks  back  upon  in  punishing, 
we  must  look  back  upon  in  repenting,  and  must 
notice  all  that  will  help  to  justify  God  in  cor- 
recting us.  And  if  we  be  penitent  and  patient 
under  what  we  suffer  for  the  sins  of  our  fathers, 
we  may  expect  that  He  who  punishes  will  pity, 
and  soon  return  in  mercy."] 

11.  Ver.  8.  "Here  occurs  a  lesson  concerning 
slavery,  in  reference  to  which  we  must  hold,  that 
it  may  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  law  of 
nations,  but  cannot  be  considered  as  belonging  to 
the  law  of  nature,  because  man  was  created  and 
born  for  a  state  of  liberty,  but  slavery  is  the  pun- 
ishment of  sin,  as  is  evident  from  Gen.  ix.  25,  where 
slavery  was  legally  imposed  upon  Ham,  who  is,  as 
it  were,  the  patriarch  of  slaves."  Forster. — [Ser- 
vants have  ruled  over  us.  Clarke  :  "  To  be 
subject  to  such  is  the  most  painful  and  dishonora- 
ble bondage : — 

Quid  domini  fadant,  avdent  cum  talia  fares  f 

Virg.  Eel.  Hi.  16. 
'  Since  slaves  so  insolent  are  grown, 
What  may  not  masters  do?'"] 

12.  Vers.  11-14.  "We  see  by  means  of  a  pas- 
sage relating  to  the  Jews  of  that  same  period, 
when  women  begin  to  be  haughty  and  virgins 
proud,  that  they  are  brought  to  dishonor  and 
shame  (Is.  iii.  16-24).  We  see  and  learn  also, 
when  princes  and  chief  men  and  the  nobles  in  a 
land  and  nation  boast  of  their  position  and  worth, 
what  perchance  sometimes  happens  to  them  on 
that  account.  .  .  .  Likewise  when  the  old  men 
or  elders  in  the  gates,  or  in  their  courts,  let  every 
sort  of  unrighteousness  go  free  and  for  the  sake 
of  reward  and  gifts  pervert  the  right,  and  yet 
will  not  allow  their  jurisdiction  to  be  amended, 
as  the  elders  in  Judah  would  not  be  rebuked  by 
the  Prophets,  then  we  see  and  learn,  what  follows 
thereon,  that  God  lets  the  court  and  court-houses 
at  last  be  reformed  by  the  warriors  with  the 
broad  axe,  that  court  and  judges  may  be  con- 
verted, and  court-houses  lie  in  dust   and  ashes. 

.  .  .  Further,  if  the  young  men  make  too  much 
of  their  sports,  and  young  women  of  their  songs 
and  dances,  we  see  and  learn  that  God  can  cast 
the  instruments  of  music  out  of  their  hands,  and 
change  their  songs  and  dances  into  woful  lamen- 
tations, as  happened  to  the  wilful  youth  among 
the  Jewish  people :  to  those  who,  before  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity,  treated  that  matter  loo  lightly, 
misused  their  music  in  their  feasts  and  entertain- 
ments, so  that  the  Prophets,  Isaiah  in  his  fifteenth 
chapter,  Amos  in  his  sixteenth,  as  also  Jeremiah 
and  others,  were  compelled  to  preach  against  it 
with  all  their  might.  But  because  their  preach- 
ing was  not  heeded,  God  sent  the  Babylonians, 


who  stopped  their  proceedings,  so  that  their  pipes 
fell  into  the  ashes,  and  their  stringed  instru- 
ments into  the  dirt,  and  they  at  Babylon  had  to 
hang  up  their  harps  on  the  willow-trees  that 
were  there,  as  is  said  in  Ps.  cxxxvii.,  and  to 
carry  instead  of  them  mill-stones  and  wood,  till 
they  stumbled  and  fell   under   their    burdens." 

EOID.   HUNNIUS. 

13.  Ver.  13.  "  The  children  fell  under  the 
wood.  The  reason  for  this,  according  to  our 
explanation  was,  because  they  were  unwilling  to 
believe  on  the  Christ  hanging  on  the  wood. 
Hence  one  of  the  Apostles  says.  The  cross  is 
foolishness  to  the  Gentiles,  and  to  the  Jews  a 
stumbling-block.  So  then,  they  fell  down  under 
the  wood,  because  they  were  unwilling  to  ac- 
knowledge that  life  which  hangs  upon  the  wood  in 
order  to  destroy  death."  Paschasius  IuGhisler., 
p.  218. 

14.  Ver.  14.  Music.  "Music  is  an  unsuitable 
mode  of  expression  for  grief."  Another  saying  of 
Rhabanus  in  Ghisler.,  p.  221.  [And  one  wholly 
unworthy  of  repetition;  especially  impertinent 
as  a  comment  on  a  lyrical  dirge  that  sanff  its 
sorrows  with  the  accompaniment  of  musical  in- 
struments. The  young  men  gave  up  their  merry, 
jovial  songs,  to  stand  weeping  around  their  aged 
Prophet,  as  he  poured  out  the  lamentations  of 
the  church,  in  measured  cadences,  that  added 
the  melting  pathos  of  music  to  his  words  and 
helped  to  relieve  their  swelling  hearts  of  some  of 
their  tumultuous  grief. — W.  H.  H.] 

15.  Ver.  16.  The  crown  is  fallen  from  our 
head.  "  When  the  church  loses  the  grace  of  faith, 
her  crowning  honor  falls  from  her  head,  because 
she  exchanges  the  Lord  of  glory  for  the  perfidy  of 
falsehood.  But  that  the  Lord  is  indeed  the  crown 
of  the  church,  Isaiah  testifies,  when  he  says,  '  In 
that  day  the  Lord  of  hosts  shall  be  a  crown  of 
glory  and  a  diadem  of  joy  to  the  residue  of  His 
people'  (Is.  xxviii.  5).  .  .  .  Virtually  the  crown 
on  our  head  vanishes,  when  His  good-will  is  lost. 
In  reference  to  which  the  Prophet  sings  in  con- 
gratulatory strains,  '  With  the  shield  of  Thy  good- 
will Thou  hast  crowned  us,  0  Lord,'  Ps.  v.  13 
(12)."  Paschasius.  [Calvin:  "By  the  crown 
of  the  head  he  no  doubt  understands  all  those 
ornaments,  by  which  that  people  had  been 
adorned.  They  had  a  kingdom  and  priesthood, 
which  were  like  two  luminaries  or  two  precious 
jewels;  they  had  also  other  things  by  which  the 
Lord  had  adorned  them.  As,  then,  they  were  en- 
dued with  such  excellent  things,  they  are  said  to 
have  borne  a  crown  on  their  head.  But  a  crown 
was  not  only  taken  for  a  diadem, — it  was  also  a 
symbol  of  joy  and  of  honor  ;  for  not  only  kings 
then  wore  crowns,  but  men  were  crowned  at  wed- 
dings and  feasts,  at  games  also,  and  theatres. 
The  Prophet,  in  a  word,  complains  that  though 
many  ornaments  did  belong  to  the  people,  yet 
now  they  were  denuded  of  them  all :  The  crou-n, 
he  says,  has  fallen  from  our  head."] — "We  can 
use  this  plaint  to-day,  not  inappropriately,  with 
regard  to  the  condition  of  the  Roman  empire ; 
and  that  it  may  be  restored,  by  Divine  favor,  to 
its  integrity  and  splendor,  we  should  devoutly 
pray."  Forster. 

16.  Ver.  16.  The  crown  has  fallen  from 
our  head.  "Here  arises  a  question.  How  can 
this  be  reconciled  with  the  promise  or  prophecy 


194 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


of  Jacob,  in  Gen.  xlix.  10?  .  .  .  The  Rabbins 
have  given  it  as  their  opinion,  that  the  prophecy 
of  Jacob  must  be  understood  thus, — The  sceptre 
shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  until  the  king  of 
Babylon,  Nebuchadnezzar,  comes,  who  will  cast 
down  the  sceptre  of  Judah.  To  this  we  answer, 
firstly ;  That  their  banishment  was  only  a  punish- 
ment for  an  inconsiderably  short  time.  .  .  . 
Again  it  happened,  that  after  the  Babylonish 
captivity  they  had  again  their  own  regent  in  their 
own  country.  .  .  .  Besides,  God  so  wonderfully 
ordered  it,  that  in  the  midst  of  the  Babylonish 
captivity  this  sceptre  of  Judah  made  itself  plainly 
visible.  Whereas  Daniel  and  his  companions, 
who  were  of  the  royal  lineage,  and  also  of  the 
house  of  David,  were  not  only  elevated  to  high 
position  at  the  Babylonian  court,  but  Daniel  was 
appointed  at  Babylon  one  of  the  chiefest  princes 
over  the  whole  land  (Dan.  iii.).  .  .  .  Add  to  this, 
that  Jehoiachin,  the  king  of  Judah,  must  be 
raised  up  again  from  the  dust,  and  honored  and 
treated  as  a  king."  Egid.  Hunnius. 

17.  Ver.  16.  [Woe  unto  us,  that  ■we  have 
sinned!  Calvin:  "When  we  are  pressed  down 
by  adversities,  Satan  will  excite  us  to  sorrow, 
und  at  the  same  time  hurry  us  on  to  rage,  except 
this  doctrine  comes  to  our  minds,  that  we  have 
to  do  with  God,  who  is  a  righteous  Judge.  For 
the  knowledge  of  our  sins  will  tame  our  pride, 
and  also  check  all  those  clamorous  complaints, 
which  the  unbelieving  are  wont  to  utter  when 
they  rise  up  against  God.  Our  evils,  then,  ought 
to  lead  us  to  consider  God's  judgment  and  to  con- 
fess our  sins," — Scott:  "As  wasting  wars,  terri- 
ble famines,  and  heavy  oppressions  or  persecu- 
tions come  upon  nations,  for  the  sins  of  former 
and  present  generations,  when  their  appointed 
measure  of  iniquity  is  filled  up :  so  the  accumu- 
lating sins  of  a  man's  whole  life  will  be  punished 
with  tremendous  vengeance  at  last;  except  he 
obtain  an  interest  in  Him,  '  who  bare  our  sins 
in  His  own  body  on  the  tree.'  The  wrath  of  God 
turns  the  sinner's  mirth  into  mourning,  his  liberty 
into  bondage,  and  his  honor  into  disgrace  :  for 
this  the  crown  is  fallen  from  our  heads,  and  woe 
unto  us  that  we  have  sinned!"] 

18.  Ver.  17.  "  Rightly  is  the  heart  said  to  be 
made  sorrowful  on  account  of  sin,  because  where 
iniquity  takes  possession  of  the  heart  and  bur- 
dens it,  it  is  no  longer  the  habitation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit;  but  the  whole  mind  is  obscured  by  the 
mist  of  sin,  while  the  grace  of  the  Most  High 
Paraclete  disdains  to  shed  abroad  its  enlighten- 
ing influences  in  that  mind.  For  the  Holy  Spirit 
of  knowledge  flees  from  deception  (Jictum,  i.  e. 
jicluram,  fraudem),  and  wisdom  will  not  enter  a 
malevolent  soul."  Rhabanus,  in  Ghisler.,  p.  221. 

19.  Ver.  18.  The  foxes  vralk  upon  it. — 
*'  The  same  fate  which  Mount  Zion  formerly  ex- 
perienced, many  Mount  Zions,  i.  e.  churches,  ex- 
perience to-day,  which  a  few  years  ago  were 
enthusiastically  devoted  to  the  Lutheran  faith, 
but  now,  alas  for  their  wretchedness!  the  foxes 
run  about  them  destroying  the  vineyards  (Cant. 

ii.    15)."    FORSTER. 

20.  Vers.  19-21.  "  After  Jeremiah  has  related 
copiously  and  in  detail  all  his  own  sorrows  and 
those  of  his  people,  he  closes  at  last  with  a 
prayer,  to  be  a  lesson  to  us,  that  we  should  do 
likewise.     And  as  Jeremiah  did  not  permit  him- 


self to  be  deterred  from  prayer  by  his  own  sina 
and  those  of  the  people,  which  were  more  in 
number  than  the  sands  of  the  sea,  nor  frightened 
from  it  by  the  grievous  wrath  of  God;  so  we 
also,  neither  on  account  of  our  sins,  nor  yet  be- 
cause of  the  wrath  of  God,  should  restrain 
prayer."    Wiirtemb.  Summarien. 

21.  Ver.  19.  Thou,  O  LORD,  remainest 
forever.  "  His  is  an  eternal  continuance.  But 
that  Being  (Esse)  which  exists,  is  that  Being 
(Esse),  in  which  the  Father  in  the  Son  and  the 
Son  in  the  Father  exist,  so  that  they  have  a  com- 
mon eternity  and  are  essentially  one  forever." 
Paschasius  in  Ghisler.,  p.  223.  [Fadsset: 
"  (Ps.  cii.  12).  The  perpetuity  of  God's  rule 
over  human  afi'airs,  however  He  may  seem  to  let 
His  people  be  oppressed  for  a  time,  is  their 
ground  of  hope  of  restoration." — Calvin:  "When 
we  fix  our  eyes  on  present  things,  we  must  ne- 
cessarily vacillate,  as  there  is  nothing  perma- 
nent in  the  world ;  and  when  adversities  bring 
a  cloud  over  our  eyes,  then  faith  in  a  manner 
vanishes,  at  least  we  are  troubled  and  stand 
amazed.  Now  the  remedy  is,  to  raise  up  our 
eyes  to  God,  for  however  confounded  things  may 
be  in  the  world,  yet  He  remains  always  the  same. 
His  truth  may  indeed  be  hidden  from  us,  yet  it 
remains  in  Him.  In  short,  were  the  world  to 
change  and  perish  a  hundred  times,  nothing  could 
ever  afl'ect  the  immutability  of  God.  There  is, 
then,  no  doubt  but  that  the  Prophet  wished  to 
take  courage  and  to  raise  himself  up  to  a  firm 
hope,  when  he  exclaimed,  » Thou,  0  God,  re- 
mainest forever.'  By  the  word  sitting  or  remain- 
ing, he  doubtless  meant  that  the  world  is  gov- 
erned by  God.  We  know  that  God  has  no  body, 
but  the  word  sitting  ia  to  be  taken  metaphori- 
cally, for  He  is  no  God  except  He  be  the  Judge 
of  the  world."] 

22.  Ver.  19.  [Thy  throne  from  genera- 
tion to  generation.  Calvin:  "  The  throne 
of  God  designates  the  government  of  the  world. 
But  if  God  be  the  Judge  of  the  world,  then  He 
doeth  nothing,  or  sufl'ereth  nothing  to  be  done, 
but  according  to  His  supreme  wisdom  and  justice. 
....  The  throno  of  God  is  set  in  opposition  to 
chance  or  uncertain  changes  which  ungodly  men 
dream  of;  for  when  they  see  things  in  great  con- 
fusion in  the  world,  they  say  that  it  is  the  wheel 
of  fortune,  they  say  that  all  things  happen 
through  blind  fate.  Then  the  Prophet,  that  he 
might  not  be  cast  down  with  the  unbelieving, 
refers  to  the  throne  of  God,  and  strengthens 
himself  in  this  doctrine  of  true  religion, — that 
God  nevertheless  sits  on  this  throne,  though  things 
are  thus  confounded,  though  all  things  fluctuate; 
yea,  even  though  storms  and  tempests  mingle  as 
it  were  heaven  and  earth  together,  yet  God  sits 
on  His  throne  amid  all  these  disturbances.  How- 
ever turbulent,  then,  all  the  elements  may  be, 
this  derogates  nothing  from  the  righteous  and 
perpetual  judgment  of  God.  This  is  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words ;  and  hence  fruit  and  benefit 
may  be  easily  gathered."] 

23.  Ver.  20.  Wherefore  dost  Thou  forget 
us  forever?  "Not  that  God  could  have  lost 
the  treasures  of  memory  or  of  knowledge;  but 
because  He  delays,  on  account  of  some  hidden 
purpose,  to  render  aid  immediately,  while  He 
seems  to  contemn   those   wh»   pray  to  Him  and 


CHAP.  V. 


195 


offers  no  consolation  to  their  hearts.  ...  By 
reason  of  human  frailty,  the  mind  burdened 
with  troubles  thinks  God  forgetful.  For  forget- 
fulness  closes  the  fountain  of  charity,  quickly 
takes  away  the  faculty  of  compassion,  blunts  the 
edge  of  the  grace  that  is  to  be  conferred,  and 
does  not  allow  immediate  assistance  to  those  who 
are  placed  in  misery."  Paschasius  in  Ghisler., 
p.  224.  [Calvin  :  "  He  seems  here  to  expostulate 
with  God  ;  but  the  faithful,  even  when  they  pa- 
tiently bear  their  evils,  and  submit  to  God's 
scourges,  do  yet  familiarly  deposit  their  com- 
plaints in  His  bosom,  and  thus  unburden  them- 
selves. We  see  that  David  prayed,  and  no  doubt 
by  the  real  impulse  of  the  Spirit,  and  at  the  same 
time  expostulated,  '  Why  dost  Thou  forget  me  per- 
petually?' Ps.  xiii.  1.  Nor  is  there  a  doubt  but 
that  the  Prophet  took  this  complaint  from  David. 
Let  us,  then,  know,  that  though  the  faithful 
sometimes  take  this  liberty  of  expostulating  with 
God,  yet  they  do  not  put  off  reverence,  modesty, 
submission,  or  humility.  For  when  the  Prophet 
thus  inquired  why  God  should  forever  forget 
His  people  and  forsake  them,  he  no  doubt  relied 
on  his  own  prophecies,  which  he  knew  had  pro- 
ceeded from  God,  and  thus  he  deferred  his  hope 
until  the  end  of  the  seventy  years,  for  that  time 
had  been  prefixed  by  God.  But  it  was  accord- 
ing to  human  judgment  that  he  complained  in  his 
own  person  and  in  that  of  the  faithful,  that  the 
affliction  was  long;  nor  is  there  a  doubt  but  that 
he  dictated  this  form  of  prayer  to  the  faithful, 
that  it  might  be  retained  after  his  death.  He, 
then,  formed  this  prayer,  not  only  according  to 
his  own  feeling,  and  for  the  direction  of  those  of 
his  own  age ;  but  his  purpose  was  to  supply  the 
faithful  with  a  prayer  after  his  own  death,  so 
that  they  might  flee  to  the  mercy  of  God.  We 
now,  then,  perceive  how  complaints  of  this  kind 
ought  to  be  understood,  when  the  prophets  asked 
'How  long?'  as  though  they  stimulated  God  to 
hasten  the  time;  for  it  cannot  be,  when  we  are 
pressed  down  by  many  evils,  but  that  we  wish 
help  to  be  accelerated;  for  faith  does  not  wholly 
strip  us  of  all  cares  and  anxieties.  But  when 
we  thus  pray,  let  us  remember  that  our  times  are 
at  the  will  and  in  the  hand  of  God,  and  that  we 
ought  not  to  hasten  too  much.  It  is,  then,  law- 
ful for  us  on  the  one  hand  to  ask  God  to  hasten; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  we  ought  to  check  our 
impatience  and  wait  until  the  suitable  time  comes. 
Both  these  things  the  Prophet  no  doubt  joined 
together  when  he  said,  Why  skoiddest  Thou  ■per- 
petually forget  us  and  forsake  us?''~\ 

24.  Vers.  21,  22.  "Since  the  people  in  their 
prayer  longed  so  earnestly  for  their  fatherland, 
that  they  might  be  permitted  to  return  home 
again,  we  should  take  example  from  this,  in 
what  fashion  we  should  yearn  after  the  heavenly 
fatherland,  out  of  which  we  have  been  driven  by 
sin  and  transgression,  and  thrust  into  this  empty 
Babylon  of  a  sinful  world.  ...  In  Ps.  cxxvi. 
the  unspeakably  great  joy  is  described,  which 
the  Jews  will  experience  when  they  return  again 
into  their  fatherland,  out  of  the  Babylonish 
house  of  slavery  and  imprisonment.  ...  If  the 
people  of  God  so  rejoiced  and  exulted  with  loud 
shouts  of  joy,  over  the  return  to  their  earthly 
fatherland,  how  much  greater  joy  there  will  be, 
when  the  elect  are  actually  in  the  great  blessed 


home-gathering,  brought  into  the  eternal,  im- 
perishable Jerusalem."  Eqid.  Hunnius. 

25.  Ver.  21.  "  Whom  the  Lord  hath  converted, 
that  one  will  assuredly  be  saved,  'but  whom  He 
hath  despised,  no  man  can  correct,'  Eccl.  vii.  13 
[Vulg.].  But  when  he  says.  Renew  our  days  as 
from  the  beginning,  he  seems  to  ask  this,  that  as 
from  the  beginning  He  made  the  first  Patriarchs, 
Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  devoted  to  Himself  in 
the  plenitude  of  their  faith  and  love,  that  He 
would  therefore  make  them  [who  offered  this 
prayer]  also  faithful  and  devoted  to  Himself,  by 
bestowing  upon  them  the  same  gifts,  which  was 
promised  to  them  in  the  advent  of  Elias,  by  the 
Prophet  Malachi,  as  many  think  (Mai.  iv.  5)." 
Rhabanus  in  Ghisler.,  p.  224. 

26.  Ver.  21.  Turn  Thou  us  unto  Thee. 
"Except  by  grace  no  backslider  can  be  con- 
verted ;  because  it  is  of  ourselves  that  we  have 
fallen,  but  of  God  that  we  rise  again."  Pascha- 
sius in  Ghisler.,  p.  224.  [Henry:  "They  here 
pray  for  converting  grace,  to  prepare  and  qualify 
them  for  mercy ;  Turn  us  to  Thee,  0  Lord.  This 
implies  an  acknowledgment  of  their  own  weak- 
ness and  inability  to  turn  themselves,  and  that 
the  cause  of  their  distance  was  in  themselves. 
There  is  in  our  nature  a  bent  to  backslide  from 
God,  but  no  disposition  to  return  to  Him,  till  His 
grace  works  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do.  So  ne- 
cessary is  that  grace,  that  we  may  truly  say, 
2'urn  us,  or  we  shall  wander  endlessly;  and  so 
powerful  and  effectual  is  that  grace,  that  we  may 
as  truly  say.  Turn  us  and  we  shall  be  turned;  for 
it  is  a  day  of  Almighty  power,  in  which  God's 
people  are  made  willing  and  obedient."']  And 
•we  shall  be  turned.  "  When  we  are  con- 
verted, we  are  recalled  to  the  beginning  of  reno- 
vation; but  when  that  is  attained,  we  will  be  re- 
newed." Paschasius  in  Ghisler.,  p.  224.  Re- 
new our  days  as  of  old.  "God  has  been 
ready  to  change  His  sentence,  if  thou  hadst  been 
willing  to  change  thy  wickedness  by  penitence." 
Ambrose  on  Luke,  in  Forster.  [William 
Lowth:  "Do  Thou  give  us  the  grace  of  conver- 
sion and  amendment,  and  then  Thou  wilt  remove 
Thy  heavy  judgments,  and  restore  us  to  that 
happiness  and  prosperity  which  we  formerly 
enjoyed."] 

27.  Ver.  22.  "  He  did  not  utter  these  words  as 
1  if  despairing  of  the  salvation  of  his  people,  but 
( that  he  might  manifest  his  excessive  grief  on 
j  account  of  the  prolonged  humiliation  and  rejec- 
I  tion  of  his  nation.  For  he  saw  by  the  Spirit  of 
I  prophecy,  that  the  Jews  themselves,  at  the  ad- 
;  vent  of  Christ,  would  not  believe.  ,  .  .  But  of  the 

ultimate  conversion  of  his  nation  he  entertained 
no  doubt, — but  believed  most  fully  that  in  the 
seed  of  Abraham  all  the  families  of  the  earth 
would  be  blessed ;  in  which  universal  promise 
themselves  also  are  certainly  comprehended." 
Rhabanus  in  Ghisler. 

28.  Ver.  22.  "  As  long  as  we  wander  here  in 
this  world,  we  shall  be  called  upon  to  observe 
the  condition  of  the  condemned  and  lost,  and 
when  we  see  it,  we  will  indeed  mourn  over  it. 
Yet  the  Church  of  Christ  is  everywhere  to  be 
found,  if  men  seek  her,  and  she  triumphs  over 
all  death.  In  her  also  many  ages  perish ;  we 
shall  mourn  for  her  in  time,  but  will  be  comforted 
in  eternity,  for  our  mother  is  that    Jerusalem, 


196 


THE  LAMENTATIONS  OF  JEREMIAH. 


which  is  from  above,  which  is  free.  She  is  eter- 
nal, and  those  who  here  suffer  for  sin  and  have 
comfort  only  in  grace,  they  are  citizens  of  that 
eternal  city."  Diedrich.  [Scott:  "Though  we 
should  mourn  over  the  miseries  of  the  world,  and 
the  low  estate  of  the  Church,  yet  the  true  Zion, 
to  which  believers  are  come,  cannot  be  desolated, 
but  remaineth  for  ever,  even  as  the  throne  of  our 
God  in  Heaven.  This  inheritance  cannot  be 
forfeited  or  alienated ;  nor  can  our  mansions  be 
possessed  by  strangers;  or  our  relation  to  God, 
as  espoused  and  adopted  into  His  family,  abro- 
gated: or  the  liberty,  wherewith  Christ  hath 
made  us  free,  taken  from  us;  the  freeness  of  our 
salvation,  disannulled;  or  our  joy  and  glory- 
ing in  Christ,  made  void.  Various  tribulations 
may  make  our  hearts  faint  and  our  eyes  dim : 
but  our  way  to  the  mercy-seat  of  our  reconciled 
God  still  is  open  ;  and  we  may  beseech  Him  not 
to  forsake  or  forget  us ;  and  plead  with  Him  to 
turn,  and  renew  us  more  and  more  by  His  grace  ; 
that  our  hopes  may  revive  and  our  consolations 
abound  as  in  the  days  of  old.  For  the  eternal 
and  unchangeable  God  will  not  utterly  reject  His 
Church  or  any  true  believer,  whatever  our  trials, 
fears  or  lamentations  may  be.  Let  us  then,  in  all 
our  troubles,  put  our  whole  trust  and  confidence  in 
His  mercy  ;  let  us  confess  our  sins,  and  pour  out 
our  hearts  before  Him  ;  and  let  us  watch  against 
repinings  or  despondency,  whatever  we  suffer, 
or  witness  of  the  troubles  of  our  brethren ;  for 
this  we  surely  know,  that  it  shall  be  well  in  the 
event  with  all  who  trust,  fear,  love  and  serve  the 
Lord."] 

29.  [Prayer.  Calvin:  "  Grant,  Almighty  God, 
that  as  Thou  didst  formerly  execute  judgment 
so  severe  on  Thy  people, — 0  grant,  that  these 
chastisements  may  at  this  day  teach  us  to  fear 
Thy  Name,  and  also  keep  us  in  watchfulness 
and  humility,  and  that  we  may  so  strive  to  pur- 
sue the  course  of  our  calling,  that  we  may  find 
that  Thou  art  always  our  leader,  that  Thy  hand 
is  stretched  forth  to  us,  that  Thy  aid  is  ever 
ready  for  us,  until,  being  at  length  gathered  into 
Thy  celestial  kingdom,  we  shall  enjoy  that  eter- 
nal life,  which  Thine  only-begotten  Son  has  ob- 
tained for  us  by  His  own  blood.     Amen."] 

HOMILETICAL   AND   PRACTICAL. 

1.  Ver.  1.  If  we  say.  Remember,  O  LORD, 
consider  and  behold,  this  supposes  that  the 
Lord  can,  in  some  way,  forget  something  or  not 
8e6  it.  But  in  fact  He  is  omniscient  and  omni- 
present. If  then  He  sometimes,  in  some  way, 
seems  not  to  know  or  to  see  something,  this  is  to 
be  regarded  as  a  test  (Priifung)  imposed  upon 
us.  He  would  then  be  awakened,  as  it  were.  He 
would  be  urged  to  think  of  these  things  and  to 
look  upon  them.  This  reserve  on  the  part  of 
God  has  a  twofold  design.  He  would  thereby, 
first  of  all,  bring  us  to  a  knowledge  of  ourselves. 
For  then  only  will  we  urge  another,  who  will  not 
hear  us,  with  unceasing  importunity,  to  render 
us  assistance,  when  we  find  that  we  have  not  in 
ourselves,  even  with  our  utmost  exertion,  the 
means  of  relief.  Secondly,  God  would  thereby 
prove  our  faith.  Compare  the  parables  of  the 
unjust  .Judge  (Luke  xviii.  2-8)  and  of  the  friend 
who   knocks  at    mi<lnight   (Luke    xi.   .5-10).      On 


this  text,  therefore,  a  sermon  might  be  preached 
with  reference  to  The  wise  purposes  which  God  hat 
in  view,  when  He  long  closes  His  ears  to  our  prayer. 
He  would  by  this  means,  1.  lead  us  to  self-know- 
ledge ;  2.  try  the  strength  of  our  faith. 

2.  Vers.  1-7.  These  verses  would  afford  a  text, 
in  times  of  severe  chastisement  by  the  hand  of 
foreign  enemies,  for  a  sermon  on  the  theme.  The 
cry  of  need  of  a  people  severely  oppressed  by  an 
enemy.  1.  This  is  a  cry  justified  by  the  facta 
(vers.  2-6).  2.  A  penitential  cry  (ver.  7).  3.  A 
believing  cry  (ver.  1). 

3.  Vers.  8-16.  On  these  verses  also  a  sermon 
could  be  preached  in  the  days  of  a  great  national 
calamity  brought  about  by  the  oppression  of  the 
public  enemy.  The  thought  might  be  extracted 
from  these  verses,  that  the  separate  items  of  suf- 
fering correspond  with  the  sins  that  have  been 
perpetrated  [per  quod  quis  peccat,  per  idem  puni- 
tur  et  ipse.  Wisdom  of  Sol.  xi.  16).  Theme:  The 
just  judgments  of  God.     I.  What  they  consist  in. 

I.  Because  we  allowed  ourselves  to  be  ruled  by 
our  sins,  now  servants  rule  over  us.  2.  Because 
we  despised  the  bread  of  life,  which  was  freely 
and  generously  proffered  to  us,  we  must  ourselves 
seek,  with  great  difficulty,  to  get  our  daily  bread. 
3.  Because  we  hungered  not  after  righteousness, 
we  must  now  suffer  great  pain  from  bodily  hun- 
ger. 4.  Because  we  crucified  not  our  lust  and 
passions,  our  wives  and  daughters  are  become 
the  victims  of  the  lusts  of  others.  5.  Because 
we  honored  not  our  old  men  and  rulers,  our 
Princes  and  Elders  are  now  ill-treated  by  for- 
eigners. 6.  Because  the  youths  and  boys  would 
not  bear  the  easy  yoke  of  the  Lord,  they  must 
now  bear  the  heavy  yoke  of  our  enemies.  7. 
Because  old  and  young  had  been  too  much  ad- 
dicted to  worldly  pleasure,  they  must  now  re- 
linquish all  joy,  even  that  which  in  itself  is  in- 
nocent and  allowable  (vers.  14,  15).  8.  Because 
we  have  not  striven  after  the  crown  of  life,  the 
crown  of  earthly  honor  is  dashed  from  our  head. 

II.  Whereto  they  should  excite  us.  1.  To  genu- 
ine lamentation  over  our  sins.  2.  To  believing 
invocation  of  Divine  grace  and  mercy. 

4.  Vers.  15,  16.  Forster  remarks,  "These 
verses  afford  material  for  an  address  to  be  de- 
livered in  a  time  of  public  mourning,  or  at  the 
funeral  of  a  prince  or  any  man  of  illustrious 
merit  in  the  commonwealth,  either  ecclesiastical 
or  civil." 

5.  Vers.  17-22.  In  times  of  great  internal  or 
external  distress  of  the  church,  these  words 
would  afford  a  text  for  a  sermon,  and  the  theme 
thence  deduced  is.  The  complaint  and  consolation 
of  the  Church.  I.  The  complaint.  1.  The  cause 
of  it  (ver.  18).  2.  The  expression  of  it  (ver.  17). 
II.  The  consolation.  1.  The  power  of  the  Lord 
of  the  Church  is  not  shaken.  2.  He  has  not 
rejected  His  Church  forever,  but  will  re-establish 
it,  (a)  inwardly,  (6)  externally. 

6.  Vers.  21,  22,  and  iii.  24-26,  preached  upon 
by  CuNO  Maurice  Zimmermann,  when  pastor  in 
Dobeln  ;  How  God  the  Lord  renews  His  Church 
1.  Behold  with  adoration  and  thanksgiving  how 
He  did  it  in  the  days  of  Luther.  2.  Behold 
with  rapture  and  obedience,  how  He  does  it 
in  our  day.  In  "  My  last  six  official  sermons 
in  Dobeln,  in  the  year  1863."  Leipzig,  Teub- 
ner,  1864. 


Date  Due 


MO  2  0^^ 


/■■*  •«. 


^-^: 


mi'/  ^'^ 


i>f«?^22I^ 


^ 


__j^^^0»^^ 


W^F»"2w^Bfti5  I 


1 

I 


-4 


